[fdt] Fwd: [Webtransport] Standards for protocol headers?

Scott Morgan <scott@adligo.com> Sat, 13 June 2020 00:53 UTC

Return-Path: <scott@adligo.com>
X-Original-To: fdt@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: fdt@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 015603A1681 for <fdt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 17:53:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.896
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.896 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_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=adligo-com.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 doAhCPx2Jn0b for <fdt@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 17:53:17 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-oi1-x232.google.com (mail-oi1-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::232]) (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 00D313A1680 for <fdt@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 17:53:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-oi1-x232.google.com with SMTP id a21so10398715oic.8 for <fdt@ietf.org>; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 17:53:16 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=adligo-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=JhFHs77HANS5/BIIZ1afcIssx+jzBXfkDFXSL2A0Kzc=; b=JD42XqbSo+9SAMvR7raciYWjfjG+7N5WfupS2OY0r0aQQ+SFiwP9QZz1lnNCH1Yefk 9G5AH59GdmtYVbffs1lOIA1uPOvZBdXBm8yaipOezN9s25ypdRTQcAyBWNIKDMJ5+tQj fHcM3FrtlX9J7s387ZJILpRJHyDyCmwjlIs1m/yEpOixnhevyApyTKiEi+Wgz0DJvLqw bgXdpwx8fstk5rRlO8OOysYh2J/OXu7nbP0o7gSKdrwGWFm9lDIj0uiLFybPn4JfJa/o P+77PBxG3j0qpZK8XwRvZsr2hqc4ZmUUBsSlczyCngwRjD1/g9YB/Jtwrno2ojSx8XHU AeTw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=JhFHs77HANS5/BIIZ1afcIssx+jzBXfkDFXSL2A0Kzc=; b=U1Mg4INoXHaPsB8AY8ytUwTLpcHYMZJYNz/1CLQW9ts0X0cN+YmxWLCEjnfxSbvhBH up30ufl6xZuhgUYJTQ/xSKNQbAWV5ZIdBIOZ/9CMgu0Lg7WGr2CYAtl7bI4igbFAl31V IOp0mTCvvoYIM5LKvZPdKf/Kxpxu+l2zouaXzIEpamaTONijeP6b8gctAd/o2W5Cu2Yc MKzs+jlE2ZuTNajXngcti1R2uw5WxlvgwmJHmPfhTVtdv7xKnrGx3Dv8HJ6ShYZVZHbs o4MZ34tThCjIGBjcuIPdk10eMrNTt/sFbDlTPUjebRiuEgSaCvLjeh9b/Iq0cLowOeM/ MEvQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530pNGXZDo1RE3FoLxNY7lnsoI5tnhrwN/5LA9yHKrerJi8BfUmj pzKC+PsHBDJ41ANJB50MJj2msG6g2WgIsTgaRfEJL1HWaIB9xg==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwtSEi1YWp0RdWAQwBWhR34d2Ux+kYl8Pdj5nYaLVkdiTQdjHdCnhAeCJ6DIOz2ovjSTTMcTpmQkl2NK3G+j48=
X-Received: by 2002:aca:902:: with SMTP id 2mr1100462oij.151.1592009595870; Fri, 12 Jun 2020 17:53:15 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CANEdHmhypZE01SHw--UgrpG1yuOU67cKXHv0Jbecyb7sJzYPZA@mail.gmail.com> <2804eb55-e79a-3383-9ebf-cd4f495b273a@petit-huguenin.org> <CANEdHmhPWwO-pO7D_biTQ1_b5oh3xCsdXEi7Urf8sXJQcvVVGw@mail.gmail.com> <ecabce9e-d09f-6ce1-cd17-dea1e793a4cf@acm.org>
In-Reply-To: <ecabce9e-d09f-6ce1-cd17-dea1e793a4cf@acm.org>
From: Scott Morgan <scott@adligo.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2020 19:53:04 -0500
Message-ID: <CANEdHmiZVdx93Sj1xf6wKPhoBxWGTB9q_WbesJx5FJ26Q0Jzjg@mail.gmail.com>
To: fdt@ietf.org, webtransport@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="000000000000717e5405a7ec9e8f"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/fdt/eIVNZ7tewq_0C3BXoo4AymgSkn0>
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sat, 13 Jun 2020 00:44:54 -0700
Subject: [fdt] Fwd: [Webtransport] Standards for protocol headers?
X-BeenThere: fdt@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Mailing list for the discussion of the use of formal description techniques in IETF documents <fdt.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/fdt>, <mailto:fdt-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/fdt/>
List-Post: <mailto:fdt@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:fdt-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/fdt>, <mailto:fdt-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2020 00:53:19 -0000

Hi Marc,

   Thanks, I'm not trying to be intentionally confusing :)  In an attempt
to clarify, I'm trying to create a new structured PDU format that could be
used to define PDU description languages (not a primary concern) as well as
larger data structures like files or bytes in datagrams.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protocol_data_unit

Lets continue @ fdt@ietf.org !

Cheers,
Scott

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Marc Petit-Huguenin <petithug@acm.org>
Date: Fri, Jun 12, 2020 at 10:03 AM
Subject: Re: [Webtransport] Standards for protocol headers?
To: Scott Morgan <scott@adligo.com>, <webtransport@ietf.org>


Hi Scott,

I still find your terminology confusing.  I am not sure if you are
proposing to design a new PDU description language (ala ASN.1, ABNF, RBNF,
CDDL, XML RELAX, etc..) or a new structured PDU format (ala DER, BER, XML,
JSON, CBOR, etc...).  If it is the former, I would suggest to resend your
email to fdt@ietf.org, where we discuss this kind of things.

Thanks.

On 6/12/20 7:25 AM, Scott Morgan wrote:
> Hi Marc,
>
>    Thanks for responding!  I meant 'protocol header' in the broadest
> sense.  I have implemented some protocols in the past (Web Socket v13,
SMTP
> etc) and work a lot with JSON and XML as I mentioned previously.  Here are
> some general frustrations (i.e. problem statement) that I'm looking to
> overcome;
>
> 1) JSON and XML generally lack support for binary data (there are some
> workarounds but nothing is super great).
> 2) JSON and XML both now have the concept of a Schema
>          Note I think the concept of a Schema is a good thing but also
feel
> that Schemas often don't cover all
>      Metadata that needs to be covered.  Perhaps the concept of a Schema
> needs to be enhanced by UsageMetadata information.
>          Also note I am frustrated with JSON's inability to provide human
> readable schemas (multi line text in the .json file (not /n)).
>          I also have frustrations with XML schemas and XML (like everyone
> else who now favors JSON over XML)
> 3) Protocol's often have Headers and other information which act in a
> similar fashion to Schemas (i.e. they describe / specify data structures)
>
>   I'm wondering if it's time for a new markup language that can support
> binary data and assist in specifying protocol byte segments in addition to
> more general purpose transport and storage data (like JSON & XML do).
>   I'm thinking about calling it 'Classification Markup Notation'.
>
>   I messaged this to the group just to throw the idea out there, to get
> feedback and also to find collaborators.
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2020 at 7:53 AM Marc Petit-Huguenin <
marc@petit-huguenin.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On 6/10/20 5:14 PM, Scott Morgan wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>>    I have been working with JSON, XML and some protocol headers recently
>>> and I am wondering...
>>> Why are there no real standard text formats for protocol headers, or am
I
>>> missing something?
>>>
>>> It seems to me that a slightly more streamlined/optimal binary/markup
>>> standard could help protocols attain POCs and adoption much quicker and
>>> help reduce some of the work defining protocols.
>>>
>>> Any thoughts on this topic?
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Can you please elaborate on what you mean by "protocol header"?  My
>> understanding of that term is the fixed part at the beginning of a PDU,
PDU
>> that also contains a variable length part after it (as in UDP Header, TCP
>> Header, RTP Header, HTTP, SIP, SMTP etc...), but that definition does not
>> seem to apply to JSON or XML (as a whole).
>>

-- 
Marc Petit-Huguenin
Email: marc@petit-huguenin.org
Blog: https://marc.petit-huguenin.org
Profile: https://www.linkedin.com/in/petithug



-- 
Regards,
Scott Morgan
President & CEO
Adligo Inc
http://www.adligo.com
https://www.linkedin.com/in/scott-morgan-21739415
A+ Better Business Bureau Rating
<https://www.bbb.org/chicago/business-reviews/computer-software-publishers-and-developers/adligo-inc-in-chicago-il-88381256>
https://github.com/adligo

By Appointment Only:
1-866-968-1893 Ex 101
scott@adligo.com
skype:adligo1?call
Send Me Files Securely:
*https://www.sendthisfile.com/f.jsp?id=ewOnyeFQM18IDRf7MMIdolfI
<https://www.sendthisfile.com/f.jsp?id=ewOnyeFQM18IDRf7MMIdolfI>*