Laurence Lundblade <l...@island-resort.com> wrote:
> Let me try to be more clear.
> The COSE standard now is:
> kid => bstr
> If we make this change:
> kid => int / bstr
> then we break backwards compatibility for COSE as Mike pointed out
I don't think that this breaks *compatibility*
Old signed objects are still valid.
Things signed with a kid => int are incompatible with old implementations,
but so is "intkid => int", so there is no difference. If you need to send
stuff to an old implementations (and the COSE ecosystem is very very young),
then can just stick to bstr format kids.
Old implementations can't process new things. That's life.
Building things so that new features mean something to new implementations,
but are ignored by old implementations is called backwards compatibility.
But you can't have that anyway in this case.
It's one of the features of CBOR, as a self-describing format, that we can
introduce new ways to do things.
--
Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ COSE mailing list COSE@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cose
