Generally agree with what you say below, Carsten.
It is partly my mistake for bringing up 8152bis. I didn’t realize 9051 and 9052
were out. I only brought it up because someone else suggested we put the CWT
CDDL in a COSE document.
I believe there has been some confusion between these two:
On 2022-01-04, at 14:02, Jeremy O'Donoghue wrote:
>
> I absolutely would not put the CWT CDDL into RFC8152bis – it is a payload
> definition, and RFC8152 is nicely agnostic as to payload right now – it makes
> sense to keep it that way.
Obviously.
But before I agree with you any further,
I absolutely would not put the CWT CDDL into RFC8152bis – it is a payload
definition, and RFC8152 is nicely agnostic as to payload right now – it makes
sense to keep it that way. I agree with Laurence that RFC8152bis needs a way to
indicate the payload type.
I think it most logically fits into
On Dec 17, 2021, at 1:46 PM, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
> Laurence Lundblade wrote:
>> So the question is: where should the CDDL for a CWT go? Here’s the main
>> options I can think of:
>> - EAT
>> - UCCS
>> - CWTbis (a revision of CWT to include CDDL)
>> - Some other new standard
>> - no
> On 17. Dec 2021, at 23:54, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
>
> Carsten Bormann wrote:
>>> Laurence Lundblade wrote:
So the question is: where should the CDDL for a CWT go? Here’s the main
options I can think of:
- EAT
- UCCS
- CWTbis (a revision of CWT to include
Carsten Bormann wrote:
>> Laurence Lundblade wrote:
>>> So the question is: where should the CDDL for a CWT go? Here’s the main
options I can think of:
>>> - EAT
>>> - UCCS
>>> - CWTbis (a revision of CWT to include CDDL)
>>> - Some other new standard
>>> - no
On 17. Dec 2021, at 22:46, Michael Richardson wrote:
>
>
> Laurence Lundblade wrote:
>> So the question is: where should the CDDL for a CWT go? Here’s the main
>> options I can think of:
>> - EAT
>> - UCCS
>> - CWTbis (a revision of CWT to include CDDL)
>> - Some other new standard
>> - no
Laurence Lundblade wrote:
> So the question is: where should the CDDL for a CWT go? Here’s the main
options I can think of:
> - EAT
> - UCCS
> - CWTbis (a revision of CWT to include CDDL)
> - Some other new standard
> - no where, never create it
I'd say that it should
