[Suit] UUID reference in draft-ietf-suit-information-model

Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org> Tue, 26 March 2019 20:26 UTC

Return-Path: <rdd@cert.org>
X-Original-To: suit@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: suit@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1722120B00 for <suit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 13:26:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cert.org
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JlqaJV00hdI4 for <suit@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 13:26:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from veto.sei.cmu.edu (veto.sei.cmu.edu []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F02C7120AFE for <suit@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 13:26:15 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from delp.sei.cmu.edu (delp.sei.cmu.edu []) by veto.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id x2QKQEHI035648 for <suit@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 16:26:14 -0400
DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 veto.sei.cmu.edu x2QKQEHI035648
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cert.org; s=yc2bmwvrj62m; t=1553631974; bh=PgkzvuKTdptx5+oEvJcRFJtrbhjrvwFqi7fdvDweKns=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:From; b=eH3/5xJby4KGI7r7h0uzSa8Z7+ShXH1I7nqhDE+7/KNYSfHIIW6IYNJVN41YFPsOU DffHsep3KUQXUgMkqb18Rfh1m5XtebBUDfSyYO8DI1fBWrlziPKYLRiRAjoBgMUkh8 U9T5pgA04DQ+a3U1TU5LCqKDu1YiN9gmZyVgWHeY=
Received: from CASSINA.ad.sei.cmu.edu (cassina.ad.sei.cmu.edu []) by delp.sei.cmu.edu (8.14.7/8.14.7) with ESMTP id x2QKQA1E022522 for <suit@ietf.org>; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 16:26:10 -0400
Received: from MARCHAND.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([]) by CASSINA.ad.sei.cmu.edu ([]) with mapi id 14.03.0435.000; Tue, 26 Mar 2019 16:26:10 -0400
From: Roman Danyliw <rdd@cert.org>
To: "suit@ietf.org" <suit@ietf.org>
Thread-Topic: UUID reference in draft-ietf-suit-information-model
Thread-Index: AdTkD9FaUxHv5dzrT7W8AUtGdbPwrw==
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 20:26:09 +0000
Message-ID: <359EC4B99E040048A7131E0F4E113AFC01B330D634@marchand>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
x-originating-ip: []
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/suit/zIb8toFs4XPFfu6iN-mSwZ6vFjQ>
Subject: [Suit] UUID reference in draft-ietf-suit-information-model
X-BeenThere: suit@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Software Updates for Internet of Things <suit.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/suit>, <mailto:suit-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/suit/>
List-Post: <mailto:suit@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:suit-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/suit>, <mailto:suit-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 20:26:18 -0000


Sections 3.3 and 3.4 of draft-ietf-suit-information-model makes reference to different types of UUID formats and generation schemes without citation or explanation.  [RFC4122] is included in the references section.  Assuming RFC4112 UUIDs are the formats in question, RFC4112 should be cited in these sections.  

There is also asymmetry in terminology, RFC4112 describes "versions" UUIDs, but this draft uses the term "types".  Is it accepted practice that these terms are interchangeable? 

Finally, it seems like RFC4112 should be a normative reference because it is needed to explain how to make the UUIDs in Sections 3.3 and 3.4.