Re: [core] core-yang-cbor-mapping: CBOR tag review

[Christian Amsüss <[e-mail]>]

Hello YANG authors,

> I've been asked by IANA to expert-review the tag allocations for
> yang-cbor-mapping, and while I do see no fundamental red flags (which
> would surprise me, given one of the registry experts is on the authors
> team), I'd like to understand better a few aspects of the registrations:

there has been a mix-up -- the tags *are* already registered, so please
disregard any questions as to the 1+1/1+2 range.

The points about the internal references on usage stand (albeit more in
a "commenter late to the party" capacity).

A new point I should raise reviewing what will now be changes to the
registry is the type changes: tags 43 and 44 used to tag bstr and uint,
respectively. While there is no need in the RFC-to-be to dwell on its
draft history: Have implementations of this document followed the
changes that led to the altered tag payloads? If not, is there anything
better than bailing that implementers can do when faced with the tags as
they used to be used?

BR
Christian

-- 
To use raw power is to make yourself infinitely vulnerable to greater
powers.
  -- Bene Gesserit axiom