-----Original Message-----
From: Robert Wilton via Datatracker <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2020 11:05 AM
To: The IESG <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; Matthew Miller <[email protected]>;
[email protected]
Subject: Robert Wilton's No Objection on draft-ietf-cose-rfc8152bis-struct-10:
(with COMMENT)
Robert Wilton has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-cose-rfc8152bis-struct-10: No Objection
When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email
addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory
paragraph, however.)
Please refer to https://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.
The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-cose-rfc8152bis-struct/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I've only reviewed the diffs, not the historical approved text. Everything
looks okay to me. A few minor comments/nits:
Comment:
1.4. CBOR Grammar
The CDDL grammar is informational; the prose description is normative.
I'm not familiar with the CDDL grammar, and specifically whether there is any
tooling that can use the grammar to generate structures/etc. If there is, then
I think that it would be helpful if the CDDL grammar was also normative, in the
sense that readers of the spec should be able to assume that the CDDL is
correct. I would still be okay with a statement that says that if there is any
ambiguity between the two then the prose description should be taken as being
definitive.
[JLS] I am not aware of any tools today that can be used to generate code form
CDDL although I believe it is only a matter of time until they exist. The
current tools allow one to validate that a CBOR encoded object does or does not
match the CDDL. I have used these tools to do validation, but since I have not
used tools for generation I am not sure what to do. It is my firm belief that
the text and the CDDL are both the same. The reason that the CDDL is not
normative is not because of this, but because I am not willing yet to have a
normative dependency on the CDDL document.
Nits:
1.5. CBOR-Related Terminology
The presence in a CBOR map of a label that is not a text string or an integer
is an error.
This sentence was changed from the original formulation, but I find it slightly
clunky. Perhaps:
The presence of a label, that is neither a text string nor an integer, in a
CBOR map, is an error.
[JLS] done
9. Taxonomy of Algorithms used by COSE
In this section, a taxonomy of the different algorithm types that can
be used in COSE is laid out. This taxonomy should not be considered
to be exhaustive. New algorithms will be created which will not fit
into this taxonomy. If this occurs, then new documents addressing
this new algorithms are going to be needed.
Nit, this -> these
[JLS] I just deleted the sentence for Ben so this is moot.
Regards,
Rob
_______________________________________________
COSE mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
