Re: [secdir] secdir review of draft-ietf-json-text-sequence-11

[Nico Williams <[e-mail]>]

On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 03:44:05PM -0500, Carl Wallace wrote:
> On 12/16/14, 2:37 PM, "Nico Williams" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >It's not.  I just don't think one should encode JSON text sequences this
> >way.  After lunch I'll propose text explicitly requiring sequence
> >encoders to also invoke the JSON text encoder.
> 
> Most of the words in this now very long thread stem from this. I will wait
> to review new text. I don’t think there is any lack of clarify on the
> signature issue. Most of the remainder is related to the document’s
> recognition of <RS>123<RS> as a detachable truncation problem but not
> <RS>123<LF><RS> where the truncation occurred prior to invoking the
> sequence encoder. 

In section 2.2, add before the last paragraph:

   JSON text sequence encoders are expected to ensure that the sequence
   elements are properly formed. When the JSON text sequence encoder
   does the JSON text encoding, the sequence elements will naturally be
   properly formed. When the JSON text sequence encoder accepts
   already-encoded JSON texts, the JSON text sequence encoder ought to
   to parse them before adding them to a sequence.

Nico
--