Re: [Ext] Consensus call for qlog serialization format (issue #144)

Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org> Fri, 06 August 2021 14:59 UTC

Return-Path: <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
X-Original-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: quic@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C8253A31F2; Fri, 6 Aug 2021 07:59:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 txqjCgbMQwyJ; Fri, 6 Aug 2021 07:59:51 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ppa4.dc.icann.org (ppa4.dc.icann.org [192.0.46.77]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 06D2C3A31ED; Fri, 6 Aug 2021 07:59:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from MBX112-E2-CO-1.pexch112.icann.org (out.mail.icann.org [64.78.33.7]) by ppa4.dc.icann.org (8.16.0.43/8.16.0.43) with ESMTPS id 176Exnow006915 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 6 Aug 2021 14:59:49 GMT
Received: from MBX112-W2-CO-1.pexch112.icann.org (10.226.41.128) by MBX112-W2-CO-1.pexch112.icann.org (10.226.41.128) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.858.15; Fri, 6 Aug 2021 07:59:48 -0700
Received: from MBX112-W2-CO-1.pexch112.icann.org ([10.226.41.128]) by MBX112-W2-CO-1.pexch112.icann.org ([10.226.41.128]) with mapi id 15.02.0858.015; Fri, 6 Aug 2021 07:59:48 -0700
From: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@icann.org>
To: Robin MARX <robin.marx=40uhasselt.be@dmarc.ietf.org>
CC: QUIC WG <quic@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Ext] Consensus call for qlog serialization format (issue #144)
Thread-Topic: [Ext] Consensus call for qlog serialization format (issue #144)
Thread-Index: AQHXh6GqzcTca2ik1k+IeIsm09R9Natg1OOAgAAfh4CAAAy6AIAETYKAgABJBQCAADFbgIABPHoAgAAH+oA=
Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2021 14:59:48 +0000
Message-ID: <E74B9BDA-7C52-454F-A228-38BCD47C86C2@icann.org>
References: <CALGR9oZS=k8XhyfugHH6VmdMVAAj6ER8s18g5eaZqX_3hie4ig@mail.gmail.com> <46CBE180-6B80-4B29-AAE3-BABBC59A02C4@icann.org> <CALGR9obnuPNYcFh1tZanFoLE1FCRSfQ1WoEEcSL+uc_5usGNSA@mail.gmail.com> <89EE247B-A26C-4C58-863C-6C938A6BA023@icann.org> <CALGR9oa0Q=N+E3ycDMBPM6HLkeGa4anWA+taJ3f088fxbo3S4Q@mail.gmail.com> <CC735BD8-0AF3-4E99-BD12-78C4181C3E19@icann.org> <CALGR9oZTgmfnsKykOvB=mwOg8QUaLtEuAVWtZn_uZ_iBj7f2xg@mail.gmail.com> <CAC7UV9Z0LGDzyMoGozoRrONJg9JKEJpBKB9knMw_imJyRwqZ3g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC7UV9Z0LGDzyMoGozoRrONJg9JKEJpBKB9knMw_imJyRwqZ3g@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: yes
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-originating-ip: [192.0.32.234]
x-source-routing-agent: Processed
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_84D25D5D-E61A-464D-9A12-C55B2C45A0AA"; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg="sha-256"
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.391, 18.0.790 definitions=2021-08-06_05:2021-08-05, 2021-08-06 signatures=0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/quic/_JVw1lQbRs0Bpqde9fbuZLVOrLU>
X-BeenThere: quic@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Main mailing list of the IETF QUIC working group <quic.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/quic/>
List-Post: <mailto:quic@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/quic>, <mailto:quic-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2021 14:59:55 -0000

Slicing it down to a minimum:


On Aug 6, 2021, at 7:31 AM, Robin MARX <robin.marx=40uhasselt.be@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:
> With regards to having a canonical serialization format (JSON) or canonical data definition (as Lucas said, probably CDDL-based), I personally have a very large preference for the latter. 

Excellent! We agree. It is still good to have the eventual JSON serialization format in the documents, because it will be the easiest to grok for those of us who are "learn by example".

If this is the way the WG goes, I volunteer to do a CBOR serialization. If the WG loves it so much that it also puts it into the documents, great, but if not, it can easily be a standalone document that developed in parallel with the data-definition-plus-JSON document. I also volunteer to help with the JSON, if needed (I was previoulsy co-chair if the JSON WG).

--Paul Hoffman