Re: [Rats] Call for adoption (after draft rename) for Yang module draft

[Michael Richardson <[e-mail]>]

On 2019-11-12 4:59 p.m., Schönwälder, Jürgen wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 04:22:47PM +0800, Michael Richardson wrote:
>>
>> On 2019-11-12 3:52 a.m., Laurence Lundblade wrote:
>>> One more note on this. It seems wrong-headed to try express claims in
>>> YANG. To do that we’d need to invent a YANG signing standard (YOSE?).
>>> Seems like YANG should be thought of as RPC / conveyance / transport
>>> here, not as a way to format a signed attestation token.
>> YANG is an information model (think ASN.1).
> YANG people believe YANG is used to define data models.

Yes, I mis-spoke.

>
>> It is for humans and for code generators, protocol inspectors, etc, it
>> is never bits on the wire.
>> It needs to be expressed somehow (XML, JSON, CBOR), which is akin to
>> BER/DER.
> This is what YANG people call an encoding (or representation) of
> instance data (that conforms to a YANG schema). YANG today supports
> XML and JSON, CBOR is in the making (but for a long time).

Well, yes, I'm using it on anima-constrained-voucher, and yes, it has
been a long time, but we are mostly done, so I think we can say that
CBOR is included.