[Rats] Where does a EAT end? (was: Re: WGLC for https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-rats-eat)

[Thomas Fossati <[e-mail]>]

{Lemaître hat on}

"where does a EAT end?"

The CDDL has:

$$EAT-{CBOR,JSON}-{Unt,T}agged-Token /= ...

which says it is theoretically possible to extend a EAT to cover
anything, as long as it looks like a CBOR or JSON stream.

The EAT I-D defines the CWT, JWT and DEB types.

But UCCS will have to plug into the same CDDL socket soon.

And Simon's proposal to add the "EAT collection" type [1] uses the same
mechanism to extend the semantics of a EAT in the same direction as DEB
- i.e., by providing an aggregation primitive.

My observation is that unless the EAT I-D contains clear criteria for
scoping its type system its governance can become quite tricky down the
line.

cheers, thanks

[1] https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-frost-rats-eat-collection/



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.