Minutes interim-2019-cbor-05: Wed 18:00
minutes-interim-2019-cbor-05-201902271800-00

Meeting Minutes Concise Binary Object Representation Maintenance and Extensions (cbor) WG
Title Minutes interim-2019-cbor-05: Wed 18:00
State Active
Other versions plain text
Last updated 2019-02-27

Meeting Minutes
minutes-interim-2019-cbor-05-201902271800

   CBOR WG Conference Call
Wednesday, Feb 27 2019, 18:00 - 19:00 UTC
Chairs: Barry Leiba, Francesca Palombini

Minute takers: Francesca

Participants:
* Francesca Palombini
* Carsten Bormann
* Jim Schaad
* Laurence Lundblade
* Paul Hoffman
* Michael Richardson
* Jeff Sipek
* Jeffrey Yasskin

Agenda:
    * CDDL Status
    * CBOR Bis status
    * Tags documents

- CDDL Status:
    Still in IESG review, Ekr DISCUSS
    FP: AP on Barry to remind Ekr this week

- CBOR Bis:

    https://github.com/cbor-wg/CBORbis/issues
    PR17: will close 37, 45, 3 (do a check first, PR18 will contribute to close
    3) Paul: Issues in reasonably good shape, PRs still big work to be done
    Jeffrey has not had time to check the PR but will do. message from Jim from
    Jan 16 which is still to do Laurence: should I look at PR17 in detail in
    relation to 37 or 45 before it's merged? Paul: do it after? It is easier to
    check with the rest of the changes

    Issue #25:
        feels that can be closed, there is not much we can do about it.
        Jeffrey: agree
        Paul: send a message to the list

    AP Jeffrey to check both PR17 and PR18, send to authors to be merged and
    everybody to check afterward.

    https://github.com/cbor-wg/CBORbis/commits/master
    canonicalization in one section

    Tag validity (PR18)
    Carsten: always a problem with that, figured it out why: see new issue in
    the array-tags document: https://github.com/cbor-wg/array-tags/issues/1 How
    do we handle that in tag validity? worth looking at this issue in more
    detail (Carsten, Jeffrey) Paul: not assuming we're going to make progress
    on this as it is complicated Jeffrey: agree we should figure it out, but
    would not want to block progress Carsten: rather keep the flexibility in a
    way that it does not become a problem later

    IANA Considerations for CBOR Bis
    2 new registry by CBOR: simple values and tags
    Tags has been used
    Tried to have low thresholds
    IANA Considerations: only the low points are DE, but IANA still contacted DE
    Propose to mend the 1+1 and 1+2 registration policy
    1+1: specification required (minor change, more detail about Expert review)
    1+2: FCFS to ER
    MCR: what is the problem with now?
    Carsten: Problem is that someone could come and take 50 numbers and the
    expert could not stop it Paul: yes, expert review. Expert says no, they
    appeal, and goes to IETF. (for 1+1) MCR: agree, don't need to have more
    info. Francesca (hat off): likes having more text about what experts will
    decide on. Paul: don't agree with changing 2+1 to Expert Required. We can
    reconsider if get >50% of tags occupied. AP Carsten: propose to have PRs
    for next meeting about text on Expert guidelines/guidelines for tags
    requesters. Carsten: text about circuit breaker? Paul: no, that is the IESG
    job

new document: port json-seq to CBOR
    MCR: seems interesting
    Laurence: suggest a very week link to it from CBOR Bis.
    AP Carsten to propose text in CBOR Bis

Carsten: Discussion on rechartering?
Next meeting + Prague. Also discussion in the ML.