IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Cbor] Re: Early allocation for packed CBOR (Re: Reminder: CBOR WG Virtual Meeting on 2024-12-11)

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 11 December 2024 16:45 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
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 5EAF6C1840C0 for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Dec 2024 08:45:25 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.105
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.105 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=sandelman.ca
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 Ezpk3T9nKw95 for <cbor@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 11 Dec 2024 08:45:21 -0800 (PST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (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 45779C14F6AF for <cbor@ietf.org>; Wed, 11 Dec 2024 08:45:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 594E41800D; Wed, 11 Dec 2024 11:45:18 -0500 (EST)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with LMTP id 42Y5b_dRfKGO; Wed, 11 Dec 2024 11:45:17 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1733935516; bh=fXa6M0MzJxYyESCiY5+O0xbTZNZ9wDwFetXluo/s3+o=; h=From:To:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=LXrjG8no73lQxLbz8Qhg1W2lCJTw7aT7PhMiL6UlhbpbxmWEFOy8SoT/b/a3MgAOt W9Mm2GCSySmj+awPdhIKs8KkfbaH+YkVsuuF0chG+ZrgN3SNzCirnvRUvAjjhWHs3W druI7+DbiOpmHIif+Z9wQhG3SbyUQ9364LXZp0iu1czvC3Svubqjw+g44Lv64tGPQU upj3JtzGXGCRQTNh8u4cXtv7QUdSDtGvC2LpwKq9mQQliwefKUXz8h1EScI89CIaLA hKwoV0Fe4Kx6m9t4PemhIdAEudnWUvn+yUOIiVTPDMD6eY41eloJ2/AXB7YTzgA44L zIeSJHCLt/OKg==
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id EBAEC1800C; Wed, 11 Dec 2024 11:45:16 -0500 (EST)
Received: from obiwan.sandelman.ca (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id E659551; Wed, 11 Dec 2024 11:45:16 -0500 (EST)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: Michael Jones <michael_b_jones@hotmail.com>, CBOR <cbor@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <PH7PR02MB92920676E8817271E547F82FB73E2@PH7PR02MB9292.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
References: <CALaySJKDFscUBGw4CPspXJvUTkXywVHc_FrmhO3ybBWTrwjGXw@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJJ8-M9x8irtmF2pfDE3GRXU1am9n2a3XeDcmPT+kww+KA@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJKTQT_9CC-wVVd+fY1NYJ73M8CP22hn=rWrFeTJSJDEsA@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJKG3oagg6ffLTx8LgvLvnjHHA2DMGgY74E0q=rReAc4PA@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJLtUR1=G_WH4H+zoJ5LCrHjBgEf1oW104zDtFQighY+gg@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJLnKxU9m3BNPq4XayrSrorRBG2vuBz1AF-CsEBoSZe7Xg@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJKaz7C=GN5E=saiDY4KxL+9xCfM0ocZuMStEQ96FnQ4KA@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJJEXkey9vLAp8VqDXmPsWpxiWN9jjtVnGio1nMQ4K+mDQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJJfc+tET4Vm5UQjHPK5mf61O0iR-1i6=X32CYtWxZLWTQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJKdrk7aPzhT=kbE1B8pq1EBw74nmx_peSJMAoHsG5jyVQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALaySJ+fWX4zEnE5v-Q9R6eCv=kSJjnc-fsXL5PGPgac1GJAcA@mail.gmail.com> <B807C9D3-39A4-4024-BC1D-85DD84EA1735@tzi.org> <DFE56705-CCDD-4172-B577-C873E3DB4898@tzi.org> <5FEA5C07-4A39-4B58-B2AE-F261D111FCE6@cursive.net> <D0618F67-4868-4745-A526-F73DF1A98E1B@tzi.org> <98C6BEDA-C4B2-4657-ABE2-19FE637CE7 82@cursive.net> <2A875D49-DD88-42D9-969D-0841A6B41F95@tzi.org> <PH7PR02MB92920676E8817271E547F82FB73E2@PH7PR02MB9292.namprd02.prod.outlook.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.8+dev; GNU Emacs 28.2
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0;<'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2024 11:45:16 -0500
Message-ID: <29696.1733935516@obiwan.sandelman.ca>
Message-ID-Hash: OZE32LM5OWHFDPEFM7FXPE3KZCTBN3CH
X-Message-ID-Hash: OZE32LM5OWHFDPEFM7FXPE3KZCTBN3CH
X-MailFrom: mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca
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
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [Cbor] Re: Early allocation for packed CBOR (Re: Reminder: CBOR WG Virtual Meeting on 2024-12-11)
List-Id: "Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)" <cbor.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cbor/uqrMgdZY6TjxZBrSp7mR6TjI-to>
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>

Michael Jones <michael_b_jones@hotmail.com> wrote:
    > A typical draft allocating tags allocates a number that you can count
    > on one hand.  Each such tag has a human-readable description of its
    > purpose in the registry so people know what to use them for.

Sure.

But, CBOR packed isn't the same as, for instance, RFC9164 (v4/v6 tag), or
even for RFC9277 which allocated 64K tags to match all future (CoAP)
Content-Format values.   RFC9277 explicitely encouraged use of 4-byte (1+4)
tags, mind you.

    > I'd suggest that a reasonable maximum number of tags for a draft to
    > allocate for its purposes is on the order of ten.

a normal draft, sure.
CBOR Packed is infrastructure for use by other applications.
It's essentially a significant update to STD94.

    > If that's not possible for this draft to achieve that, then I suspect
    > that the draft is somehow abusing the tag mechanism to achieve
    > something other than the normal purpose of tags.


--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.31.3 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status