rfc8742.original   rfc8742.txt 
Network Working Group C. Bormann Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) C. Bormann
Internet-Draft Universitaet Bremen TZI Request for Comments: 8742 Universität Bremen TZI
Intended status: Standards Track September 25, 2019 Category: Standards Track February 2020
Expires: March 28, 2020 ISSN: 2070-1721
Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) Sequences Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) Sequences
draft-ietf-cbor-sequence-02
Abstract Abstract
This document describes the Concise Binary Object Representation This document describes the Concise Binary Object Representation
(CBOR) Sequence format and associated media type "application/cbor- (CBOR) Sequence format and associated media type "application/cbor-
seq". A CBOR Sequence consists of any number of encoded CBOR data seq". A CBOR Sequence consists of any number of encoded CBOR data
items, simply concatenated in sequence. items, simply concatenated in sequence.
Structured syntax suffixes for media types allow other media types to Structured syntax suffixes for media types allow other media types to
build on them and make it explicit that they are built on an existing build on them and make it explicit that they are built on an existing
media type as their foundation. This specification defines and media type as their foundation. This specification defines and
registers "+cbor-seq" as a structured syntax suffix for CBOR registers "+cbor-seq" as a structured syntax suffix for CBOR
Sequences. Sequences.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This is an Internet Standards Track document.
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months This document is a product of the Internet Engineering Task Force
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any (IETF). It represents the consensus of the IETF community. It has
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference received public review and has been approved for publication by the
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG). Further information on
Internet Standards is available in Section 2 of RFC 7841.
This Internet-Draft will expire on March 28, 2020. Information about the current status of this document, any errata,
and how to provide feedback on it may be obtained at
https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8742.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2020 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction
1.1. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Conventions Used in This Document
2. CBOR Sequence Format . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. CBOR Sequence Format
3. The "+cbor-seq" Structured Syntax Suffix . . . . . . . . . . 4 3. The "+cbor-seq" Structured Syntax Suffix
4. Practical Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. Practical Considerations
4.1. Specifying CBOR Sequences in CDDL . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4.1. Specifying CBOR Sequences in Concise Data Definition
4.2. Diagnostic Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Language (CDDL)
4.3. Optimizing CBOR Sequences for Skipping Elements . . . . . 5 4.2. Diagnostic Notation
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 4.3. Optimizing CBOR Sequences for Skipping Elements
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5. Security Considerations
6.1. Media Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 6. IANA Considerations
6.2. CoAP Content-Format Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6.1. Media Type
6.3. Structured Syntax Suffix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 6.2. CoAP Content-Format Registration
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 6.3. Structured Syntax Suffix
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7. References
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7.1. Normative References
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 7.2. Informative References
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Acknowledgements
Author's Address
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) [RFC7049] can be used The Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) [RFC7049] can be used
for serialization of data in the JSON [RFC8259] data model or in its for serialization of data in the JSON [RFC8259] data model or in its
own, somewhat expanded data model. When serializing a sequence of own, somewhat expanded, data model. When serializing a sequence of
such values, it is sometimes convenient to have a format where these such values, it is sometimes convenient to have a format where these
sequences can simply be concatenated to obtain a serialization of the sequences can simply be concatenated to obtain a serialization of the
concatenated sequence of values, or to encode a sequence of values concatenated sequence of values or to encode a sequence of values
that might grow at the end by just appending further CBOR data items. that might grow at the end by just appending further CBOR data items.
This document describes the concept and format of "CBOR Sequences", This document describes the concept and format of "CBOR Sequences",
which are composed of zero or more encoded CBOR data items. CBOR which are composed of zero or more encoded CBOR data items. CBOR
Sequences can be consumed (and produced) incrementally without Sequences can be consumed (and produced) incrementally without
requiring a streaming CBOR parser that is able to deliver requiring a streaming CBOR parser that is able to deliver
substructures of a data item incrementally (or a streaming encoder substructures of a data item incrementally (or a streaming encoder
able to encode from substructures incrementally). able to encode from substructures incrementally).
This document defines and registers the "application/cbor-seq" media This document defines and registers the "application/cbor-seq" media
type in the media type registry, along with a CoAP Content-Format type in the "Media Types" registry along with a Constrained
identifier. Media type structured syntax suffixes [RFC6838] were Application Protocol (CoAP) Content-Format identifier. Media type
introduced as a way for a media type to signal that it is based on structured syntax suffixes [RFC6838] were introduced as a way for a
another media type as its foundation. CBOR [RFC7049] defines the media type to signal that it is based on another media type as its
"+cbor" structured syntax suffix. This document defines and foundation. CBOR [RFC7049] defines the "+cbor" structured syntax
registers the "+cbor-seq" structured syntax suffix in the "Structured suffix. This document defines and registers the "+cbor-seq"
Syntax Suffix Registry". structured syntax suffix in the "Structured Syntax Suffix Registry".
1.1. Conventions Used in This Document 1.1. Conventions Used in This Document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
"OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in
BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all BCP 14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
capitals, as shown here. capitals, as shown here.
In this specification, the term "byte" is used in its now-customary In this specification, the term "byte" is used in its now-customary
sense as a synonym for "octet". sense as a synonym for "octet".
2. CBOR Sequence Format 2. CBOR Sequence Format
Formally, a CBOR Sequence is a sequence of bytes that is recursively Formally, a CBOR Sequence is a sequence of bytes that is recursively
defined as either defined as either of the following:
o an empty (zero-length) sequence of bytes * an empty (zero-length) sequence of bytes
o the sequence of bytes making up an encoded CBOR data item * the sequence of bytes making up an encoded CBOR data item
[RFC7049], followed by a CBOR Sequence. [RFC7049] followed by a CBOR Sequence.
In short, concatenating zero or more encoded CBOR data items In short, concatenating zero or more encoded CBOR data items
generates a CBOR Sequence. (Consequently, concatenating zero or more generates a CBOR Sequence. (Consequently, concatenating zero or more
CBOR Sequences also results in a CBOR Sequence.) CBOR Sequences also results in a CBOR Sequence.)
There is no end of sequence indicator. (If one is desired, CBOR- There is no end-of-sequence indicator. (If one is desired, CBOR
encoding an array of the CBOR data model values being encoded -- encoding an array of the CBOR data model values being encoded,
employing either a definite or an indefinite length encoding -- as a employing either a definite or an indefinite length encoding, as a
single CBOR data item may actually be the more appropriate single CBOR data item may actually be the more appropriate
representation.) representation.)
CBOR Sequences, unlike JSON Text Sequences [RFC7464], do not use a CBOR Sequences, unlike JSON Text Sequences [RFC7464], do not use a
marker between items. This is possible because CBOR encoded data marker between items. This is possible because CBOR-encoded data
items are self-delimiting and the end can always be calculated. items are self delimiting and the end can always be calculated.
(Note that, while the early object/array-only form of JSON was self- (Note that, while the early object/array-only form of JSON was self
delimiting as well, this stopped being the case when simple values delimiting as well, this stopped being the case when simple values
such as single numbers were made valid JSON documents.) such as single numbers were made valid JSON documents.)
Decoding a CBOR Sequence works as follows: Decoding a CBOR Sequence works as follows:
o If the CBOR Sequence is an empty sequence of bytes, the result is * If the CBOR Sequence is an empty sequence of bytes, the result is
an empty sequence of CBOR data model values. an empty sequence of CBOR data model values.
o Otherwise, decode a single CBOR data item from the bytes of the * Otherwise, one must decode a single CBOR data item from the bytes
CBOR sequence, and insert the resulting CBOR data model value at of the CBOR Sequence and insert the resulting CBOR data model
the start of the result of repeating this decoding process value at the start of the result of repeating this decoding
recursively with the remaining bytes. (A streaming decoder would process recursively with the remaining bytes. (A streaming
therefore simply deliver zero or more CBOR data model values, each decoder would therefore simply deliver zero or more CBOR data
as soon as the bytes making it up are available.) model values, each as soon as the bytes making it up are
available.)
This means that if any data item in the sequence is not well-formed, This means that if any data item in the sequence is not well formed,
it is not possible to reliably decode the rest of the sequence. (An it is not possible to reliably decode the rest of the sequence. (An
implementation may be able to recover from some errors in a sequence implementation may be able to recover from some errors in a sequence
of bytes that is almost, but not entirely a well-formed encoded CBOR of bytes that is almost, but not entirely, a well-formed encoded CBOR
data item. Handling malformed data is outside the scope of this data item. Handling malformed data is outside the scope of this
specification.) specification.)
This also means that the CBOR Sequence format can reliably detect This also means that the CBOR Sequence format can reliably detect
truncation of the bytes making up the last CBOR data item in the truncation of the bytes making up the last CBOR data item in the
sequence, but not entirely missing CBOR data items at the end. A sequence, but it cannot detect entirely missing CBOR data items at
CBOR Sequence decoder that is used for consuming streaming CBOR the end. A CBOR Sequence decoder that is used for consuming
Sequence data may simply pause for more data (e.g., by suspending and streaming CBOR Sequence data may simply pause for more data (e.g., by
later resuming decoding) in case a truncated final item is being suspending and later resuming decoding) in case a truncated final
received. item is being received.
3. The "+cbor-seq" Structured Syntax Suffix 3. The "+cbor-seq" Structured Syntax Suffix
The use case for the "+cbor-seq" structured syntax suffix is The use case for the "+cbor-seq" structured syntax suffix is
analogous to that for "+cbor": It SHOULD be used by a media type when analogous to that for "+cbor": it SHOULD be used by a media type when
parsing the bytes of the media type object as a CBOR Sequence leads the result of parsing the bytes of the media type object as a CBOR
to a meaningful result that is at least sometimes not just a single Sequence is meaningful and is at least sometimes not just a single
CBOR data item. (Without the qualification at the end, this sentence CBOR data item. (Without the qualification at the end, this sentence
is trivially true for any +cbor media type, which of course should is trivially true for any +cbor media type, which of course should
continue to use the "+cbor" structured syntax suffix.) continue to use the "+cbor" structured syntax suffix.)
Applications encountering a "+cbor-seq" media type can then either Applications encountering a "+cbor-seq" media type can then either
simply use generic processing if all they need is a generic view of simply use generic processing if all they need is a generic view of
the CBOR Sequence, or they can use generic CBOR Sequence tools for the CBOR Sequence or use generic CBOR Sequence tools for initial
initial parsing and then implement their own specific processing on parsing and then implement their own specific processing on top of
top of that generic parsing tool. that generic parsing tool.
4. Practical Considerations 4. Practical Considerations
4.1. Specifying CBOR Sequences in CDDL 4.1. Specifying CBOR Sequences in Concise Data Definition Language
(CDDL)
In CDDL [RFC8610], CBOR sequences are already supported as contents In Concise Data Definition Language (CDDL) [RFC8610], CBOR Sequences
of byte strings using the ".cborseq" control operator (Section 3.8.4 are already supported as contents of byte strings using the
of [RFC8610]), by employing an array as the controller type: ".cborseq" control operator (Section 3.8.4 of [RFC8610]) by employing
an array as the controller type:
my-embedded-cbor-seq = bytes .cborseq my-array my-embedded-cbor-seq = bytes .cborseq my-array
my-array = [* my-element] my-array = [* my-element]
my-element = my-foo / my-bar my-element = my-foo / my-bar
CDDL currently does not provide for unadorned CBOR sequences as a Currently, CDDL does not provide for unadorned CBOR Sequences as a
top-level subject of a specification. For now, the suggestion is to top-level subject of a specification. For now, the suggestion is to
use an array, as for the ".cborseq" control operator, for the top- use an array for the top-level rule, as is used for the ".cborseq"
level rule and add English text that explains that the specification control operator, and add English text that explains that the
is really about a CBOR sequence with the elements of the array: specification is really about a CBOR Sequence with the elements of
the array:
; This defines an array, the elements of which are to be used ; This defines an array, the elements of which are to be used
; in a CBOR sequence: ; in a CBOR Sequence:
my-sequence = [* my-element] my-sequence = [* my-element]
my-element = my-foo / my-bar my-element = my-foo / my-bar
(Future versions of CDDL may provide a notation for top-level CBOR (Future versions of CDDL may provide a notation for top-level CBOR
sequences, e.g. by using a group as the top-level rule in a CDDL Sequences, e.g., by using a group as the top-level rule in a CDDL
specification.) specification.)
4.2. Diagnostic Notation 4.2. Diagnostic Notation
CBOR diagnostic notation (see Section 6 of [RFC7049]) or extended CBOR diagnostic notation (see Section 6 of [RFC7049]) or extended
diagnostic notation (Appendix G of [RFC8610]) also does not provide diagnostic notation (Appendix G of [RFC8610]) also does not provide
for unadorned CBOR Sequences at this time (the latter does provide for unadorned CBOR Sequences at this time (the latter does provide
for CBOR Sequences embedded in a byte string in Appendix G.3 of for CBOR Sequences embedded in a byte string as per Appendix G.3 of
[RFC8610]). [RFC8610]).
In a similar spirit to the recommendation for CDDL above, this In a similar spirit to the recommendation for CDDL above, this
specification recommends enclosing the CBOR data items in an array. specification recommends enclosing the CBOR data items in an array.
In a more informal setting, where the boundaries within which the In a more informal setting, where the boundaries within which the
notation is used are obvious, it is also possible to leave off the notation is used are obvious, it is also possible to leave off the
outer brackets for this array, as shown in these two examples: outer brackets for this array, as shown in these two examples:
[1, 2, 3] [1, 2, 3]
skipping to change at page 5, line 52 skipping to change at line 239
Note that it is somewhat difficult to discuss zero-length CBOR Note that it is somewhat difficult to discuss zero-length CBOR
Sequences in the latter form. Sequences in the latter form.
4.3. Optimizing CBOR Sequences for Skipping Elements 4.3. Optimizing CBOR Sequences for Skipping Elements
In certain applications, being able to efficiently skip an element In certain applications, being able to efficiently skip an element
without the need for decoding its substructure, or efficiently without the need for decoding its substructure, or efficiently
fanning out elements to multi-threaded decoding processes, is of the fanning out elements to multi-threaded decoding processes, is of the
utmost importance. For these applications, byte strings (which carry utmost importance. For these applications, byte strings (which carry
length information in bytes) containing embedded CBOR can be used as length information in bytes) containing embedded CBOR can be used as
the elements of a CBOR sequence: the elements of a CBOR Sequence:
; This defines an array of CBOR byte strings, the elements of which ; This defines an array of CBOR byte strings, the elements of which
; are to be used in a CBOR sequence: ; are to be used in a CBOR Sequence:
my-sequence = [* my-element] my-sequence = [* my-element]
my-element = bytes .cbor my-element-structure my-element = bytes .cbor my-element-structure
my-element-structure = my-foo / my-bar my-element-structure = my-foo / my-bar
Within limits, this may also enable recovering from elements that Within limits, this may also enable recovering from elements that
internally are not well-formed -- the limitation is that the sequence internally are not well formed; the limitation is that the sequence
of byte strings does need to be well-formed as such. of byte strings does need to be well formed as such.
5. Security Considerations 5. Security Considerations
The security considerations of CBOR [RFC7049] apply. This format The security considerations of CBOR [RFC7049] apply. This format
provides no cryptographic integrity protection of any kind, but can provides no cryptographic integrity protection of any kind but can be
be combined with security specifications such as COSE [RFC8152] to do combined with security specifications such as CBOR Object Signing and
so. (COSE protections can be applied to an entire CBOR sequence or Encryption (COSE) [RFC8152] to do so. (COSE protections can be
to each of the elements of the sequence independently; in the latter applied to an entire CBOR Sequence or to each of the elements of the
case, additional effort may be required if there is a need to protect sequence independently; in the latter case, additional effort may be
the relationship of the elements in the sequence.) required if there is a need to protect the relationship of the
elements in the sequence.)
As usual, decoders must operate on input that is assumed to be As usual, decoders must operate on input that is assumed to be
untrusted. This means that decoders MUST fail gracefully in the face untrusted. This means that decoders MUST fail gracefully in the face
of malicious inputs. of malicious inputs.
6. IANA Considerations 6. IANA Considerations
6.1. Media Type 6.1. Media Type
Media types are registered in the media types registry Media types are registered in the "Media Types" registry
[IANA.media-types]. IANA is requested to register the MIME media [IANA-MEDIA-TYPES]. IANA has registered the media type for CBOR
type for CBOR Sequence, application/cbor-seq, as follows: Sequence, application/cbor-seq, as follows:
Type name: application Type name: application
Subtype name: cbor-seq Subtype name: cbor-seq
Required parameters: N/A Required parameters: N/A
Optional parameters: N/A Optional parameters: N/A
Encoding considerations: binary Encoding considerations: binary
Security considerations: See RFCthis, Section 5. Security considerations: See RFC 8742, Section 5.
Interoperability considerations: Described herein. Interoperability considerations: Described herein.
Published specification: RFCthis. Published specification: RFC 8742.
Applications that use this media type: Data serialization and Applications that use this media type: Data serialization and
deserialization. deserialization.
Fragment identifier considerations: N/A Fragment identifier considerations: N/A
Additional information: Additional information:
o Deprecated alias names for this type: N/A * Deprecated alias names for this type: N/A
o Magic number(s): N/A * Magic number(s): N/A
o File extension(s): N/A * File extension(s): N/A
o Macintosh file type code(s): N/A * Macintosh file type code(s): N/A
Person & email address to contact for further information: Person & email address to contact for further information:
cbor@ietf.org cbor@ietf.org
Intended usage: COMMON Intended usage: COMMON
Author: Carsten Bormann (cabo@tzi.org) Author: Carsten Bormann (cabo@tzi.org)
Change controller: IETF Change controller: IETF
6.2. CoAP Content-Format Registration 6.2. CoAP Content-Format Registration
IANA is requested to assign a CoAP Content-Format ID for the media IANA has assigned a CoAP Content-Format ID for the media type
type "application/cbor-seq", in the CoAP Content-Formats subregistry "application/cbor-seq", within the "CoAP Content-Formats" subregistry
of the core-parameter registry [IANA.core-parameters], from the of the "Constrained RESTful Environments (CoRE) Parameters" registry
"Expert Review" (0-255) range. The assigned ID is shown in Table 1. [IANA-CORE-PARAMETERS], from the "Expert Review" (0-255) range
([RFC8126]). The assigned ID is shown in Table 1.
+----------------------+----------+-------+-----------+
| Media type | Encoding | ID | Reference |
+----------------------+----------+-------+-----------+
| application/cbor-seq | - | TBD63 | RFCthis |
+----------------------+----------+-------+-----------+
Table 1: CoAP Content-Format ID +----------------------+----------+----+-----------+
| Media type | Encoding | ID | Reference |
+======================+==========+====+===========+
| application/cbor-seq | - | 63 | RFC 8742 |
+----------------------+----------+----+-----------+
RFC editor: Please replace TBD63 by the number actually assigned and Table 1: CoAP Content-Format ID
delete this paragraph.
6.3. Structured Syntax Suffix 6.3. Structured Syntax Suffix
Structured Syntax Suffixes are registered within the "Structured Structured Syntax Suffixes are registered within the "Structured
Syntax Suffix Registry" maintained at Syntax Suffix Registry" maintained at
[IANA.media-type-structured-suffix]. IANA is requested to register [IANA-STRUCTURED-SYNTAX-SUFFIX]. IANA has registered the "+cbor-seq"
the "+cbor-seq" structured syntax suffix in accordance with structured syntax suffix in accordance with [RFC6838] as follows:
[RFC6838], as follows:
Name: CBOR Sequence Name: CBOR Sequence
+suffix: +cbor-seq +suffix: +cbor-seq
References: RFCthis References: RFC 8742
Encoding considerations: binary Encoding considerations: binary
Fragment identifier considerations: The syntax and semantics of Fragment identifier considerations: The syntax and semantics of
fragment identifiers specified for +cbor-seq SHOULD be as fragment identifiers specified for +cbor-seq SHOULD be the same as
specified for "application/cbor-seq". (At publication of this that specified for "application/cbor-seq". (At the time of
document, there is no fragment identification syntax defined for publication of this document, there is no fragment identification
"application/cbor-seq".) syntax defined for "application/cbor-seq".)
The syntax and semantics for fragment identifiers for a The syntax and semantics for fragment identifiers for a
specific "xxx/yyy+cbor-seq" SHOULD be processed as follows: specific "xxx/yyy+cbor-seq" SHOULD be processed as follows:
For cases defined in +cbor-seq, where the fragment o For cases defined in +cbor-seq, if the fragment identifier
identifier resolves per the +cbor-seq rules, then process as resolves per the +cbor-seq rules, then process as specified
specified in +cbor-seq. in +cbor-seq.
For cases defined in +cbor-seq, where the fragment
identifier does not resolve per the +cbor-seq rules, then
process as specified in "xxx/yyy+cbor-seq".
For cases not defined in +cbor-seq, then process as o For cases defined in +cbor-seq, if the fragment identifier
does not resolve per the +cbor-seq rules, then process as
specified in "xxx/yyy+cbor-seq". specified in "xxx/yyy+cbor-seq".
o For cases not defined in +cbor-seq, process as specified in
"xxx/yyy+cbor-seq".
Interoperability considerations: n/a Interoperability considerations: n/a
Security considerations: See RFCthis, Section 5 Security considerations: See RFC 8742, Section 5
Contact: CBOR WG mailing list (cbor@ietf.org), or any IESG- Contact: CBOR WG mailing list (cbor@ietf.org), or any IESG-
designated successor. designated successor.
Author/Change controller: IETF Author/Change controller: IETF
7. References 7. References
7.1. Normative References 7.1. Normative References
[IANA.core-parameters] [IANA-CORE-PARAMETERS]
IANA, "Constrained RESTful Environments (CoRE) IANA, "Constrained RESTful Environments (CoRE)
Parameters", Parameters",
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/core-parameters>. <https://www.iana.org/assignments/core-parameters>.
[IANA.media-type-structured-suffix]
IANA, "Structured Syntax Suffix Registry",
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/
media-type-structured-suffix>.
[IANA.media-types] [IANA-MEDIA-TYPES]
IANA, "Media Types", IANA, "Media Types",
<http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types>. <https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types>.
[IANA-STRUCTURED-SYNTAX-SUFFIX]
IANA, "Structured Syntax Suffix Registry",
<https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-type-structured-
suffix>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
[RFC7049] Bormann, C. and P. Hoffman, "Concise Binary Object [RFC7049] Bormann, C. and P. Hoffman, "Concise Binary Object
Representation (CBOR)", RFC 7049, DOI 10.17487/RFC7049, Representation (CBOR)", RFC 7049, DOI 10.17487/RFC7049,
October 2013, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7049>. October 2013, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7049>.
skipping to change at page 10, line 9 skipping to change at line 420
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6838>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6838>.
[RFC7464] Williams, N., "JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Text [RFC7464] Williams, N., "JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Text
Sequences", RFC 7464, DOI 10.17487/RFC7464, February 2015, Sequences", RFC 7464, DOI 10.17487/RFC7464, February 2015,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7464>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc7464>.
[RFC8091] Wilde, E., "A Media Type Structured Syntax Suffix for JSON [RFC8091] Wilde, E., "A Media Type Structured Syntax Suffix for JSON
Text Sequences", RFC 8091, DOI 10.17487/RFC8091, February Text Sequences", RFC 8091, DOI 10.17487/RFC8091, February
2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8091>. 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8091>.
[RFC8126] Cotton, M., Leiba, B., and T. Narten, "Guidelines for
Writing an IANA Considerations Section in RFCs", BCP 26,
RFC 8126, DOI 10.17487/RFC8126, June 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8126>.
[RFC8152] Schaad, J., "CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE)", [RFC8152] Schaad, J., "CBOR Object Signing and Encryption (COSE)",
RFC 8152, DOI 10.17487/RFC8152, July 2017, RFC 8152, DOI 10.17487/RFC8152, July 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8152>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8152>.
[RFC8259] Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data [RFC8259] Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data
Interchange Format", STD 90, RFC 8259, Interchange Format", STD 90, RFC 8259,
DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017, DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017,
<https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8259>. <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8259>.
[RFC8610] Birkholz, H., Vigano, C., and C. Bormann, "Concise Data [RFC8610] Birkholz, H., Vigano, C., and C. Bormann, "Concise Data
Definition Language (CDDL): A Notational Convention to Definition Language (CDDL): A Notational Convention to
Express Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) and Express Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR) and
JSON Data Structures", RFC 8610, DOI 10.17487/RFC8610, JSON Data Structures", RFC 8610, DOI 10.17487/RFC8610,
June 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8610>. June 2019, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8610>.
Acknowledgements Acknowledgements
This draft has mostly been generated from [RFC7464] by Nico Williams This document has mostly been generated from [RFC7464] by Nico
and [RFC8091] by Erik Wilde, which do a similar, but slightly more Williams and [RFC8091] by Erik Wilde, which do a similar but slightly
complicated exercise for JSON [RFC8259]. Laurence Lundblade raised more complicated exercise for JSON [RFC8259]. Laurence Lundblade
an issue on the CBOR mailing list that pointed out the need for this raised an issue on the CBOR mailing list that pointed out the need
document. Jim Schaad and John Mattsson provided helpful comments. for this document. Jim Schaad and John Mattsson provided helpful
comments.
Author's Address Author's Address
Carsten Bormann Carsten Bormann
Universitaet Bremen TZI Universität Bremen TZI
Postfach 330440 Postfach 330440
Bremen D-28359 D-28359 Bremen
Germany Germany
Phone: +49-421-218-63921 Phone: +49-421-218-63921
Email: cabo@tzi.org Email: cabo@tzi.org
 End of changes. 58 change blocks. 
151 lines changed or deleted 157 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.45. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/