Re: [core] 🔔 WGA multipart/core

[Alexander Pelov <[e-mail]>]

+1

Best,
Alexander



> Le 18 juin 2018 à 10:35, Klaus Hartke <[e-mail]> a écrit :
> 
> +1
> 
> On 14 June 2018 at 10:49, Padmakumar Subramani <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> +1
>> 
>> On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 10:32 AM Jaime Jiménez <[e-mail]>
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Dear all,
>>> 
>>> based on the ongoing discussion on the Multipart Content-Format for CoAP
>>> and the dependency with ACE, we will issue a 2 week Working group Adoption
>>> call for this draft.
>>> 
>>> Ciao!
>>> - - Jaime Jiménez
>>> 
>>> On 8 Jun 2018, at 16.41, Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> I updated the draft based on the input we have so far (thanks to everyone
>>> replying!).
>>> (I added alternative text media-type labels as a trial balloon; we can
>>> always remove them in the WG discussion.
>>> We can also decide between single-byte and two-byte identifier.)
>>> 
>>> Name: draft-fossati-core-multipart-ct
>>> Revision: 05
>>> Title: Multipart Content-Format for CoAP
>>> Htmlized:
>>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fossati-core-multipart-ct-05
>>> Diff:
>>> https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-fossati-core-multipart-ct-05
>>> 
>>> This should be ready for working-group adoption call now.
>>> 
>>> Grüße, Carsten
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Please initiate
>>> 
>>> On Jun 7, 2018, at 09:33, Jaime Jiménez <[e-mail]>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> Thank you all for the constructive discussion. To summarise some of the
>>> raised points so far:
>>> 
>>> - Dependency on EST-COAP, which is targeted for WGLC in next IETF.
>>> - Multipart/core can't be registered. AD pointed out that it is not
>>> possible to register "multipart" as a top-level media type. Author's
>>> proposal to rename it under application (i.e. -
>>> "application/multipart-core").
>>> - Should the identifier be a single byte or two?
>>> - Expert media-type review confirmation needed.
>>> 
>>> If the authors could submit a new version soon, I’ll trigger the WGA call
>>> so that we have consensus on the draft before next IETF.
>>> 
>>> Ciao!
>>> - - Jaime Jiménez
>>> 
>>> On 7 Jun 2018, at 1.10, Michael Richardson <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Carsten Bormann <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Jun 6, 2018, at 19:47, Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> The only other name I might imagine is application/multipart-cbor, as
>>> slightly more descriptive, but it's a bikeshed question.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> There is not that much CBOR there….  But the interesting point about
>>> this specific format is not so much the razor-thin CBOR envelope, but
>>> that this is using Content-Format identifiers from the CoRE Parameters
>>> registry — hence the “core” in the proposed name.  We may want to
>>> 
>>> 
>>> That's a reasonable argument for calling it multipart-core.
>>> 
>>> --
>>> ]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh
>>> networks [
>>> ]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        | network
>>> architect  [
>>> ]     [e-mail]  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails
>>> [
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> core mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> core mailing list
>>> [e-mail]
>>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> core mailing list
>> [e-mail]
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> core mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core