[core] CORECONF protocol name and other discussions

Ivaylo Petrov <ivaylo@ackl.io> Mon, 22 June 2020 11:53 UTC

Return-Path: <ivaylo@ackl.io>
X-Original-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: core@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7857E3A0C36 for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 04:53:34 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.898
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.898 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=ackl-io.20150623.gappssmtp.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0SpRWyH3qb8R for <core@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 04:53:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-wr1-x431.google.com (mail-wr1-x431.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::431]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E16323A0C37 for <core@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 04:53:21 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-wr1-x431.google.com with SMTP id l10so16367157wrr.10 for <core@ietf.org>; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 04:53:21 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ackl-io.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ECCTOGtEgUFana0VbxNzYkW/9s2CSe0/G0/anSc0IGM=; b=wy/wejvIc0vNzk67CRwpilRCqSrl0LX3OcMeOqI9RuZ3Mdej5UCwu/GJqDefpaBiSA aSXvbwvQUJt+CTAKTzCpBaNe14uMO+j6mZ6VJDkIIwDeDJR+XNBQDn8wIitDlZa5zwiB 6l9NEMTwelDcvQJIqnlEOYODKpH6ryENavZwfbH0dQqw+nAv24h3EGH50fU/qNX1U2Kt til5FUK1iwkZ0nNQjDeFhfedOxsmCU+XF+Z++CtJDcRvyyGOQ3OI4pPctKfkREz44TYD gQPQWJStHzgBzDbJiUHpEU4CrhGsRCScOzpmOoHHo4glMk6RKIaOefiGwOlrBp5hPx66 K5DQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ECCTOGtEgUFana0VbxNzYkW/9s2CSe0/G0/anSc0IGM=; b=i0gevDGezFf/gd5g2WaMWwmb0vUOqAXFFTwzYR7K1JG2uVfqyU1KLSwZ4murzZ8I3Z QaAuUtwzEWzNt1ygdxWbgLbWQCr9ysBwpLsL7HKKPEOMJFqJOsehWcpkMfB0AYUge/T0 Kdw/K766sBXVbj6FN3Jsc+InDc6q0c72VN8IiMvsNy188DNu0qusfpLh87rVTcoHeqSo XEXUXoLVeVSm0yWjBoPQ6eI+gyDEImfQFFJj3tzUwpJEtvC3vw6CUc70Z7BAwnUQYcAY Nwllb+O3jBOFJIXw6E1y3QfjwBpYhhdMwEbHOcAENilZVPWL1WzB9du4B5YXSnjbCBMX c/Lg==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532/aEIDmktYeaAS/Y8xGBaYbWpFc2uA3tkYPjVpFMr3ssxkv3sM 0eZtpRRt0dQE0T5y7eluTLeUsbyT0eWorQhWiRwPBAw45W0=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzTHNTm+TeCQHiImt9JlWrknPwfMbMfShqzKdwMinozBnqUh4xMnZuX7MDpmAo0MJJDuVR87jLBF9HZRBEdT8o=
X-Received: by 2002:a5d:65cd:: with SMTP id e13mr20128727wrw.213.1592826799884; Mon, 22 Jun 2020 04:53:19 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Ivaylo Petrov <ivaylo@ackl.io>
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 13:52:53 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJFkdRwPR7k=gMzWn6jz-rjcsZR2Ke3s_jbw_uhwESkqZUCoZg@mail.gmail.com>
To: core <core@ietf.org>
Cc: core-chairs@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="00000000000099257505a8aae31a"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/core/x9RJkfnQgW0Rp3LmHd2CkbOA4DY>
Subject: [core] CORECONF protocol name and other discussions
X-BeenThere: core@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Constrained RESTful Environments \(CoRE\) Working Group list" <core.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/core/>
List-Post: <mailto:core@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/core>, <mailto:core-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2020 11:53:35 -0000

Dear all,

We recently pushed the last remaining changes that we were planning on
doing related to the CORECONF drafts [1], [2], [3], [4]. As always, we
greatly appreciate your feedback and comments.

The only point that I am not entirely sure how to handle is the name CoMI
vs CORECONF. In theory what Carsten and others have been suggesting is
clear - CoMI is the CoAP protocol and CORECONF is the complete solution
with Content formats. When I tried to put that into the document, I believe
there might still be some confusion as to why the CoAP protocol part needs
a name (you can find here [5] my attempt at that). If we think we could be
using it with a different content format, maybe that would be worth the
effort and I will try to modify the text so that the CoAP part is generic
in terms of Content format and there is extra text that binds this to the
Content format of CORECONF. Alternatively, we could simply decide which
name to use CORECONF (see attachment
draft-ietf-core-comi-coreconf-only.txt) or CoMI (draft-ietf-core-comi.txt).

Please let us know what your suggestions are.

Best regards,
Ivaylo

[1]:
https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-core-sid&url2=http://core-wg.github.io/yang-cbor/draft-ietf-core-sid-latest.txt
[2]:
https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-core-yang-cbor&url2=http://core-wg.github.io/yang-cbor/draft-ietf-core-yang-cbor-latest.txt
[3]:
https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-core-comi.txt&url2=https://core-wg.github.io/comi/draft-ietf-core-comi.txt
[4]:
https://tools.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url1=draft-ietf-core-yang-library&url2=http://core-wg.github.io/yang-cbor/draft-ietf-core-yang-library-latest.txt
[5]: https://github.com/core-wg/comi/tree/coreconf-and-comi