From nobody Tue Dec 20 18:26:47 2022 Return-Path: X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E96DCC14CF0C for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2022 18:26:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -6.893 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.893 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, 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=rtfm-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com 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 0sGm3-K5k3Md for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2022 18:26:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail-pj1-x102a.google.com (mail-pj1-x102a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::102a]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CED1CC14F74F for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2022 18:26:40 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-pj1-x102a.google.com with SMTP id t11-20020a17090a024b00b0021932afece4so693072pje.5 for ; Tue, 20 Dec 2022 18:26:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=rtfm-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=ojrG1MGH7VpVXAHTVObjia7385RqZqPk4UXEodO/C7Y=; b=R+JZ5BQrLAhYOJGo/BEUgCKTboX52D8+qopDR68IiuWdFnrW/11zTRRwdydAgBabWk SpU4VBCIXJxZ/9If3aW1YKb9fUCOAjqmz+evU2PAfVwniXqex4aW5wCzA/+ujfOhj59k NkGDteohSJmsXuPee6KR9r82raaBY7HDQCRGy6uvy9q2OnvEFYLAUuP1iimgn8VIRfwU S95kcAuYVhk0ptcw8M86PFGz7tyTfHfaiBo4zHVYVPRZWe1yZG7O9hqGBEH+j7qOl4rb GX4yD/dxujSuxLY87ArkSDSnG/QKmgHQaGgLSEhlkbO6EMfRhQXrLCoxlCSWwaef2FBN pymQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=ojrG1MGH7VpVXAHTVObjia7385RqZqPk4UXEodO/C7Y=; b=R4EWcodX9sF3EyKvqQl0EdLYRiQT7Ucp/ROATB/iu9A/VrqWztRaJbJeVgxv9LCJh3 kKxuB0fwnrocq5m1imvHZFdPJZquwc1Z73WaFrIU2KcbM4lws+1gXhqXBvTbb2cT5dmQ aqqC0v8cGcRpHdBOA3YbnzAsFdGOrdmDYcH7+j6UFYNZJAPhc/Iw2QLEZ1dxDDYWOEMU S1zn05QJpuY4BYJquWmCGZvuvkT61le5poY1UCYurwkOEpi9pKGKvtnKj530RJO/vvEg 66YYaFLgzOEBDk12mOh2/EWr+We+RrDzyL6587zJ4xzLp65DpPrIZ78ta6IFeava1P2Q fIyA== X-Gm-Message-State: AFqh2koS4ZpimIzk6yQMOX7GA+XJajrYKbFI7Nh4tEvHCsEtblR4N87m Tu5UqQzIXAQ7F0zMK2XLtlyGIwImde/e2INNS/vdW6H5LpeppQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMrXdXtBaB9zT0KwRiDeOPbAolx8v6wGBtVVFWSsfCDp3cGvuFUBH1Jl97ZyPL0mQGVVp+pyFkG3UXLimORlAH3dg20= X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:40ca:b0:189:f0ce:43db with SMTP id t10-20020a17090340ca00b00189f0ce43dbmr9914pld.88.1671589600189; Tue, 20 Dec 2022 18:26:40 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Eric Rescorla Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2022 18:26:04 -0800 Message-ID: To: Volker Mische Cc: dispatch@ietf.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000054721b05f04d48f1" Archived-At: Subject: Re: [dispatch] Finding a home for Multibase and Multihash X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39 Precedence: list List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2022 02:26:46 -0000 --00000000000054721b05f04d48f1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Preliminary question: Are these protocols fixed in the sense that they cannot be changed or are you proposing that the IETF adopt them and potentially make breaking changes? -Ekr On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 5:51 PM Volker Mische wrote: > Hi, > > I'm Volker Mische and work for Protocol Labs. I've been in the > decentralized web space for about 5 years, before that in databases. > I've been involved in Multibase and Multihash during those 5 years. > > I'm one of the maintainers of `rust-multihash` [1] and `rust-multibase` > [2]. Am happy to provide feedback during the standardization process and > update the implementations accordingly. > > My interest in Multihash is not only due to my professional involvement > at Protocol Labs, but I also see fit outside of the projects Protocol > Labs is building/supporting. I e.g. also proposed using Multihash in the > hash extension of the STAC catalog standard [3], which was accepted. > They were in need of a solution that Multihash provides: identifying a > hash. Having this standardized would be great, as then people wouldn't > need to come up with their own solutions. > > For future uses of Multhash I could imagine a Multihash-enabled checksum > tool. You wouldn't need to know which hash functions was used to create > the checksums (e.g. if the filename is lost), but you could directly > derive it from the checksum itself. > > [1]: https://github.com/multiformats/rust-multihash/ > [2]: https://github.com/multiformats/rust-multibase/ > [3]: > > https://github.com/stac-extensions/file/blob/2d9b80e0e6b81e5d9983635b794aa89990b7f480/README.md#checksums > > Cheers, > Volker > > _______________________________________________ > dispatch mailing list > dispatch@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch > --00000000000054721b05f04d48f1 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Preliminary question:
Are these protocols f= ixed in the sense that they cannot be changed or are you
proposin= g that the IETF adopt them and potentially make breaking changes?

-Ekr

On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 5:51 PM Volker Mische <= volker.mische@gmail.com> = wrote:
Hi,

I'm Volker Mische and work for Protocol Labs. I've been in the
decentralized web space for about 5 years, before that in databases.
I've been involved in Multibase and Multihash during those 5 years.

I'm one of the maintainers of `rust-multihash` [1] and `rust-multibase`=
[2]. Am happy to provide feedback during the standardization process and update the implementations accordingly.

My interest in Multihash is not only due to my professional involvement at Protocol Labs, but I also see fit outside of the projects Protocol
Labs is building/supporting. I e.g. also proposed using Multihash in the hash extension of the STAC catalog standard [3], which was accepted.
They were in need of a solution that Multihash provides: identifying a
hash. Having this standardized would be great, as then people wouldn't =
need to come up with their own solutions.

For future uses of Multhash I could imagine a Multihash-enabled checksum tool. You wouldn't need to know which hash functions was used to create=
the checksums (e.g. if the filename is lost), but you could directly
derive it from the checksum itself.

[1]: https://github.com/multiformats/rust-multihash/<= /a>
[2]: https://github.com/multiformats/rust-multibase/<= /a>
[3]:
https://github.com/stac-extensions/file/blob/2d9b80e0e6b81e5d9983635b7= 94aa89990b7f480/README.md#checksums

Cheers,
=C2=A0 =C2=A0Volker

_______________________________________________
dispatch mailing list
dispatch@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch
--00000000000054721b05f04d48f1--