Re: [Rats] New RATS

I think this is a nice addition. One comment and one question.

I am guessing the minimum value for the occurrences was set to 2 on the notion that you’d just use one of the singular alternatives in the choice definition when there is just one item to encode, but there could be cases where >1 is the norm but 1 can occur. If the minimum here was set the 1, then a collection type could be the lone top-level type where appropriate.

Why not re-use the CWT-Tagged-Message type from EAT instead of the CWT and CWT-placeholder definitions?

From: RATS <rats-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Simon Frost <Simon.Frost@arm.com>
Date: Monday, May 30, 2022 at 7:33 AM
To: "rats@ietf.org" <rats@ietf.org>
Cc: Thomas Fossati <Thomas.Fossati@arm.com>
Subject: [Rats] New RATS

FYI. I’ve just submitted a new draft for a proposed extension to the top level object in EAT.

There’s a full justification in the doc, but as a quick summary, there are difficulties in creating a top level ‘envelope’ object for a multi-token system while remaining compatible with EAT. Given the recent move to fix the list of top level objects but embrace extensions, this approach seems to be an appropriate proposal.

See: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-frost-rats-eat-collection/ & https://github.com/SimonFrost-Arm/draft-frost-rats-eat-collection

Thanks

Simon

Simon Frost

Senior Principal Systems Solution Architect, ATG, Arm

Mob: +44 7855 265691

IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. 

_______________________________________________ RATS mailing list RATS@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rats 