[Cbor] Re: CBOR-YANG/SID
Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> Sun, 04 August 2024 20:46 UTC
Return-Path: <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Original-To: cbor@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cbor@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FD8AC14F5F3; Sun, 4 Aug 2024 13:46:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.907
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.907 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CHuxoawWPaE8; Sun, 4 Aug 2024 13:46:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de [134.102.50.21]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF9DBC14F5EB; Sun, 4 Aug 2024 13:46:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from smtpclient.apple (p5dc5d809.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.197.216.9]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.zfn.uni-bremen.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4WcWnY6HjXzDCfp; Sun, 4 Aug 2024 22:46:25 +0200 (CEST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3776.700.51\))
From: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
In-Reply-To: <12239.1722797673@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Date: Sun, 04 Aug 2024 22:46:15 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <2CC71993-140E-415F-89D9-2273F11FCC49@tzi.org>
References: <24615.1722628087@obiwan.sandelman.ca> <7E75452A-79A5-4B8B-9E6A-9CEF1C090D14@tzi.org> <12239.1722797673@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
To: CBOR <cbor@ietf.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3776.700.51)
Message-ID-Hash: VMCRXHHIF4FLFM6KFTNSWQ25CPPZOQGG
X-Message-ID-Hash: VMCRXHHIF4FLFM6KFTNSWQ25CPPZOQGG
X-MailFrom: cabo@tzi.org
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-cbor.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
CC: core@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc4
Precedence: list
Subject: [Cbor] Re: CBOR-YANG/SID
List-Id: "Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)" <cbor.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/riMVd1yFS_Uz33lOJzvv49NZ0cw>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cbor>
List-Help: <mailto:cbor-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:cbor-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:cbor@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cbor-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cbor-leave@ietf.org>
> cb> https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-bormann-cbor-yang-standin-00.html > > cb> It’s mostly done. A comment Vancouver was that we should also do > cb> hex-string. > > So, CBOR ought to adopt it then? I think so. I tried to sneak it on the CBOR agenda in Vancouver, but we ran out of time. We might want to do an individual -01 in the coming week to get rid of a few of the rough edges of the text. Any opinions on how best to include hex-string, phys-address, and mac-address from 6991 welcome (preferably with a single tag, because the syntax is the same: (preferred lowercase) two-digit hex bytes separated by colons). Grüße, Carsten
- [Cbor] CBOR-YANG/SID Michael Richardson
- [Cbor] Re: [core] CBOR-YANG/SID Andy Bierman
- [Cbor] Re: CBOR-YANG/SID Carsten Bormann
- [Cbor] Re: CBOR-YANG/SID Michael Richardson
- [Cbor] Re: CBOR-YANG/SID Carsten Bormann
- [Cbor] Re: [core] Re: CBOR-YANG/SID Michael Richardson
- [Cbor] Re: [core] CBOR-YANG/SID Carsten Bormann