Agenda and minutes:
WG documents status and issues
cbor-network-address: DISCUSSes should be cleared, posted -12
CA: Well managed, should move forward.
FP: Have to double-check with Ben, then it’s on me.
cbor-file-magic: is WGLC started 2021-07-31 done yet?
CA: Sitting for a while on WGLC, two reviews came in, plus some related comments. Looks like weak support but no objection.
CB: I strongly support it. Still need to run through editorial improvements. After that it should be ready for the IESG.
CA: Just editorial changes?
CB: Right, no technical changes.
CA: Please do your update; once new version available, I’ll complete the shepherd write-up.
MCR: Fine to me.
Tag registration requests of note
CA: The document describes a tag to indicate a group of positional arguments (e.g. X/Y/Z coordinates and boolean for yes/no normalization).
CB: 1+1 is a boundary case. Name “capture” is probably specific to their platform, but as first user they can name it. 1+1 depends on use. Procedure calls in many environments often have short arguments. Even in unconstrained, may be worth saving. Maybe have planning session of how many 1+1 we plan to have.
→ CA contact author.
range used % free total
0 1+0 12 50.00 12 24
1 1+1 62 26.72 170 232
2 1+2 44 0.07 65236 65280
3 1+4 3 0.00 4294901757 4294901760
4 1+8 1 0.00 18446744069414584319 18446744069414584320
CBOR packed would bring 1+1 to 40%, but even then not at 50% after 10 years.
CA: Who has more 1+1 requests?
CB: Haskell group asking to differentiate different but syntactically identical structures. They’ll use it on the wire.
Reminder of upcoming dates
submission cutoff for IETF112: 2021-10-25
IETF112 meeting: 2021-11-06 to -12, with CBOR on Thursday -11-11 at 14:30UTC
Next interim will be after IETF 112 resuming at TBD (February 2 ± 14d?).
CA: Any regular events to consider that’d conflict with keeping this slot other than CoRE?
IMD: I have a standing conflict due to SAE. Keeping the cadence we have now would be good.
CB: When actually resume? At least a December slot.
FP: Who else is doing recurring meetings except CoRE?
MCR: OAuth on Wednesday’s 12:00 - 13:00 (UTC)?
ST: TAPS and some routing also.
FP: Just to figure out we have everything covered in terms of conflict, thinking also of other Areas.
BL: Looks like keeping this pattern is safe.
CB: We may consider a 4-week cadence.
CA: Safe to book following the bi-weekly pattern; if we realize we’re underusing slots, we can cancel some.
BL: Agreeing(?). Still good to use a bi-weekly 1h meeting for 30 minutes only.
CB: And the saved 30 minutes can be used to work on action points.
cbor-cddl-control status
FP: reminding everyone that there is the telechat tomorrow! (and this is on the agenda)
CBOR use in other SDOs
also in our own SDO – https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-sacm-coswid/
IMD: Henk Birkholz had good item in TCG on CDDL, meeting was turned into CDDL IDL (possibly integrating with build tools), 19 people, 5 SDOs, great deal of interest.
AOB
Notes: Marco Tiloca and others
[CB]: Carsten Bormann
[BL]: Barry Leiba
[FP]: Francesca Palombini
[IMD]: Ira McDonald
[MCR]: Michael Richardson
[CA]: Christian Amsüss
[MT]: Marco Tiloca
[PP]: Philip Prindeville
[ST]: Sean Turner