Approved. Sorry for the delay (now back from PTO).
Rob > -----Original Message----- > From: Toerless Eckert <[email protected]> > Sent: 31 March 2022 18:37 > To: Rob Wilton (rwilton) <[email protected]> > Cc: [email protected]; Warren Kumari <[email protected]>; Anima WG > <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Subject: Rob pls. approve: Re: Rob/Warren: Early allocation request for draft- > ietf-anima-constrained-voucher (according to RFC7120) > > Hi Rob > > This request here somehow fell through the cracks. Pls. approve. > > Thanks > Toerless > > In-Reply-To: > <[email protected] > om> > On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 03:02:45PM -0400, Warren Kumari wrote: > > This sounds fine to me, but actual approval should come from Rob. > > W > > > > On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 7:35 PM <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > Dear Rob, Warren, > > > > > > As chairs of the ANIMA WG, we hereby request your AD approval > > > for early allocation of code points from IANA according to RFC7120 > > > for draft-ietf-anima-constrained-voucher. > > > > > > This is similar to the early registration request we did for what > > > is now RFC8366 (voucher), where we requested voucher encoding with > CMS > > > (application/voucher-cms+json) in 2019. > > > > > > We have now active development and interop work (during IETF111 > Hackathon) > > > for the new encoding option for the constained voucher via COSE. It > would > > > help the ongoing pre-production implementations a lot if they would not > have to > > > come up with non-assigned code-points now. > > > > > > Toerless (for the chairs) > > > > > > Draft: > > > > > > Reference document for registration request is: > > > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-anima-constrained- > voucher-13 > > > > > > to be pushed soon after datatracker opens again, until then: > > > > > > https://github.com/anima-wg/constrained- > voucher/blob/master/constrained-voucher.txt > > > > > > We request two early allocations: > > > > > > 1. IANA "Media Types" applications registry accordin to draft section > 12.5/12.5.1: > > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media- > types.xhtml#application > > > > > > Name Template Reference > > > voucher-cose+cbor application/voucher-cose+cbor [draft-ietf-anima- > constrained-voucher] > > > > > > Template according to reference draft, section 12.5.1: > > > > > > Type name: application > > > Subtype name: voucher-cose+cbor > > > Required parameters: none > > > Optional parameters: none > > > Encoding considerations: binary > > > Security considerations: Security Considerations of THIS RFC. > > > Interoperability considerations: The format is designed to be > > > broadly interoperable. > > > Published specification: THIS RFC. > > > Applications that use this media type: ANIMA, 6tisch, and other > > > zero-touch onboarding systems > > > Additional information: > > > Magic number(s): None > > > File extension(s): .vch > > > Macintosh file type code(s): none > > > Person & email address to contact for further information: IETF > > > ANIMA WG > > > Intended usage: LIMITED > > > Restrictions on usage: NONE > > > Author: ANIMA WG > > > Change controller: IETF > > > Provisional registration? (standards tree only): NO > > > > > > 2. CoAP content type registy > > > https://www.iana.org/assignments/core-parameters/core- > parameters.xhtml#content-formats > > > > > > Media type Encoding ID References > > > ---------------------------- --------- ---- ---------- > > > application/voucher-cose+cbor TBD3 [draft-ietf-anima- > constrained-voucher] > > > > > > > > > The ANIMA WG chairs have verified that the required conditions for > > > early allocation from RFC7120, Section 2 are met: > > > > > > a) Standards Action (document is standards track ANIMA WG draft) > > > > > > b) The WG draft adequately describes the desired semantics. > > > > > > c) The WG participants actively working on implementations of the > > > draft have confirmed that the semantic of the code point is > > > stable to the extend that it is clear that the final > > > RFC will need it, and active interoperability testing is ongoing, > > > only challenged by availability of an early allocation. > > > > > > d) The working group chairs think that it would be highly helpful to > > > receive an early allocation code point now to support further > > > interoperability testing, ensuring that the final RFC has the > > > highest level of practical vetting and can be finished as soon > > > as possible. > > > > > > The request for early allocation was brought up in the working group > > > and was faced with no disagreement. The working group chairs also > > > understand that there is no risk of depletion of the registry in question. > > > > > > Thank you very much > > > Toerless (for the chairs) > > > > > > > > -- > > The computing scientist’s main challenge is not to get confused by the > > complexities of his own making. > > -- E. W. Dijkstra _______________________________________________ Anima mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
