IETF Logo Mail Archive

[Rats] DEB is a bad TLA

Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca> Wed, 03 August 2022 19:55 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: rats@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: rats@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9378C157B33 for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 12:55:02 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.706
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.706 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_INVALID=0.1, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=neutral reason="invalid (public key: not available)" header.d=sandelman.ca
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 MlZtIrefYjad for <rats@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 12:54:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 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 BC5FFC15A72C for <rats@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 12:54:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id A917B389AE for <rats@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 16:13:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id e2Ku42vhwLBE for <rats@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 16:13:43 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [209.87.249.21]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 06CB2389AD for <rats@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 16:13:43 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=sandelman.ca; s=mail; t=1659557623; bh=5rwAybm+1qNziJaTnZytUNbuC1OaBrEHZLe9DeWduR8=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:From; b=iLT2NKXXA5FzrQLJefmBAuTiAKpGbWyxmqKmK64eslESKjCp9+yzDjigpfqL0FJi/ X/IRujS8jVDXkMYOUVimZ7CrN7iMXL8lhrSgzvokEPHLY1FKe4N4jH33xxTJ92a6KV gCQxRr7ZGMZ3L37zc8mVY9i5c1amWIq3thVI8Gqoo8zQLlTbhnDQYfqOL2BeWZQAXT jEOuCWtQDoFE9/mpthGL8azsdnC/t1+H4W62S3eL61wGViUqm3DuLa3kSsFnFUfYTA FIRLx2XmOIm8XAtFXhLsLg4NnFK/3isnu1vv3lK/s8tq5sR+Ifd/oZe9aUeZRtQLEs hJhbznrGO3vqQ==
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA918121 for <rats@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Aug 2022 15:54:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr+ietf@sandelman.ca>
To: rats@ietf.org
X-Attribution: mcr
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 27.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2022 15:54:56 -0400
Message-ID: <29811.1659556496@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/rats/WNFDzRDNcLwqFR8O4CYb1_arTuo>
Subject: [Rats] DEB is a bad TLA
X-BeenThere: rats@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Remote ATtestation procedureS <rats.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/rats>, <mailto:rats-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/rats/>
List-Post: <mailto:rats@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:rats-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rats>, <mailto:rats-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Aug 2022 19:55:03 -0000

I complained a few months ago about the "DEB" TLA representing Detached EAT
Bundle.  While it was bad enough in the eat draft, we now have a media-types
draft that will enshrine it into on-the-wire things.

Given that the rest of the software community associates "DEB" with debian
packages, and they are a key part of most SBOM systems, I would like to claim
that our use of DEB is not particularly interesting, and will just cause confusion.

https://github.com/ietf-rats-wg/eat/issues/249

In addition, we have application/eat-deb+cbor, and I want to point out that
this expands to:
   EAT + Detached EAT Bundle.

so, at the last the media type should be something like:
   application/eat-bundle+cbor

I don't think that the term Detached Eat Bundle needs a TLA.

--
Michael Richardson <mcr+IETF@sandelman.ca>   . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
           Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email