From nobody Sun Sep 18 15:12:56 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 472D1127058 for ; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 15:12:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.6 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=hxr-us.20150623.gappssmtp.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9dhOQsJTWNW3 for ; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 15:12:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wm0-x233.google.com (mail-wm0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c09::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9A3D4126D74 for ; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 15:12:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-wm0-x233.google.com with SMTP id 1so128181386wmz.1 for ; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 15:12:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hxr-us.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=pyEX2ExrdBOu7e0pu9/Uc2IqstBz7UXN2kLLw/8J0uo=; b=2Mw+brzlGr8yU+I4IFWK9eFsd+m5bwOjD9zxSzT27U/KuOpmhomtE0VdPHfP8wVGdF gjsgyHXl09sih2qAazuE4vRfhi7/OGEfIPsmTKAAAGkXuDpxNkf3FqYSRUkfywFPtzhG M6nb2MjT1KsKB5J5tZB+7qhWGtZnKSE7abhYoQJ5bULu0sbC0iYMDYeloJ+bpn4YOtqn 5xag7iuzS4oTILfzJDcnCfgLgnsbpqwoV2mfS6CPx6sgs8wAeaZNIiBGJ7+yIAv+lJYy WxJ4myN1bokNYiF2eqmSzEQdIpNfYulk4oFdBzx8UkjKdROHTs2pwX77JeUfYZ+X3/im hpGw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=pyEX2ExrdBOu7e0pu9/Uc2IqstBz7UXN2kLLw/8J0uo=; b=KG7+Ofz2m02MIhvWYNrqUJRI4l3vWAsAv3gpxxlu4kdkzEe98dji/DQUD3k0DJ+Sej uI44p61nRvIlxW210Vvg2/Y6Rk7HbdiHWn4WRKPUIGFKNmdS4OBFxJNbDBzi3EIhXot3 xnOqLIsybdI85wM24kEiOqdk78AD1Q1Std1FiMetgO2SAtJZQsFw1/UoR4E57WHrwgmV EhZKxvxpAHCGWuiuAuuu15gNwFikxJvEOEbfT8YObtUo4djSjE1qhiJRYOwMj6wrfWpT SZlsOakZtjHX7QbBWwcr4aSIjuvMXzwz633s+LesvFnToIp3EZQqpESDn2qrj23BbMHi HK0Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwMO6v48yU0yZXkamrAPX+FS7eJ8GDg82HkXkcF3P4PiDQOG1uo3jeWnXdv784V+99KRpzCkdD2ak372CA== X-Received: by 10.28.203.196 with SMTP id b187mr6191370wmg.120.1474236771894; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 15:12:51 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.194.142.228 with HTTP; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 15:12:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [108.45.128.12] From: Andrew Newton Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 18:12:51 -0400 Message-ID: To: JSON WG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Subject: [Json] new version of JSON Content Rules (JCR) X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 22:12:55 -0000 All, After collecting feedback from this list, private email, and the GitHub issue tracker, we've updated JCR. This new version changes the syntax to be a proper superset of JSON along with some readability improvements and other features. Additionally, large portions of the draft have been rewritten to be more clear. Finally, the Ruby jcrvalidator has been updated to match this newest version of the draft. (gem install jcrvalidator or update to 0.6.4) The draft is available here: URL: https://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-newton-json-content-rules-07.txt Status: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-newton-json-content-rules/ Htmlized: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-newton-json-content-rules-07 Diff: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-newton-json-content-rules-07 -andy From nobody Tue Sep 20 01:38:03 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E400112B198; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 01:37:58 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.598 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id W2adGtwN8OMe; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 01:37:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-io0-x22a.google.com (mail-io0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c06::22a]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8F4F412B730; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 01:29:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id m79so12579586ioo.3; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 01:29:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=WTkh2BGS6TFaSQKZVTMMy33mCTpX8blMWgX73KXzXyE=; b=u4W1tmlTkfEUftwfwScAiQ5oglqXzOy7E333w7IoMTWzrCaZ/YprFCHekdT3SUJ/BK q37E98ht8vYb0v74h2xkXHq7Agqkfj7PHNJU0cMwebtdhMJSxFz0skoLmAHb8CcwQYXA lqDoZGngiAP1GRFzmHFEXxREgRWHICJr7gN9sgvT3c5kADd35YChbwjKdDzLiTAW4JGr yDYabYasfQC4Xn7p6wtUQ3V+zw0XaJlI//kehk3qMKoxdfczIPSFbxF+91okPDleJjSX yhuFjWI7Fc6ydC7gZ7K8NOHqImzZUAWdwRzuVja8QSLCPEU40zypfer7jjL/lLLf0LFa U8Aw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=WTkh2BGS6TFaSQKZVTMMy33mCTpX8blMWgX73KXzXyE=; b=WoKtivZppBQK+Oue4TlWB7Gxil71CI+erUulFYYVXKLS++qc0mVn2HYvqNPDHVdEZ1 9wUdTkYG2oexVp/QF3AxGH1ekV47pRzUeyvRYyqfj3onfdQNq0t2a7xxJ4OQqYarGrdy 7+uQkXpzdQYzzkDQHCnlIwowpoHvzzZNrmlSBXi0tGWgTzH4G0hMQTc71SZL1W7EZi6l xMlnv/DnGbHrz2TTalrbePgL0Qzsmdjtj+jnoyxHwtPCDXkqhTUraGBQI0Brm8sSy5c8 2wVHaOpkdhXt8jfhJ2ySxv4jf1bPDfRGH8chmAM2SuZSxEk9ngrGj42pFWb957VfexXf BwpA== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwPDRj22/Oa2t4sY7hWrxOW0E8qNvcCzJNp/2TTv5vrmZTB/HBShhau+q3IHg5B7YQpBMX0R7G0X26uw3g== X-Received: by 10.107.137.68 with SMTP id l65mr40900995iod.70.1474360163631; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 01:29:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: barryleiba.mailing.lists@gmail.com Received: by 10.107.142.151 with HTTP; Tue, 20 Sep 2016 01:29:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <49EB1F76-E29A-4EFA-8921-FC9474C751BF@fastmail.fm> References: <4c9504d3-c212-0b8c-0016-b31d653f15a6@gmail.com> <9E2C2681-B776-444F-84DC-9A28130DB2C1@cisco.com> <77e8ce0f-ceb3-0b69-54eb-635afbdf2a17@gmx.de> <9FD90C0C-FAAA-4109-856E-DF1746B78A0D@fastmail.fm> <49EB1F76-E29A-4EFA-8921-FC9474C751BF@fastmail.fm> From: Barry Leiba Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 04:29:23 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 3zpn9EK9NXvlT6NQW1kxpgo_D50 Message-ID: To: "draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis.all@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Archived-At: Cc: Alexey Melnikov , "json@ietf.org" Subject: Re: [Json] Early AD review of draft-ietf-jsonbis-rfc7159bis-02 X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 20 Sep 2016 08:37:59 -0000 Any action on this? Where are we on last-calling 7159bis? Barry On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 6:14 AM, Alexey Melnikov wrote: > Hi, > Here are my comments on the document, most of them are nits: > > "Byte order mark" in Section 8.1 needs a definition, for example by > including the Unicode codepoint value. > > In Section 11: I think you meant to update references to point to this > document, not an earlier RFC. > > Appendix A needs to be checked that it is correct. I think at least a couple > of things are out of date. > > First mention of UTF-8, UTF-16 need normative references. > > > > > Sent from my iPad > > _______________________________________________ > json mailing list > json@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json > From nobody Thu Sep 29 09:52:47 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CA21A12B1C4 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 09:52:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -16.837 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-16.837 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-2.316, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id L6osu-GzNMD2 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 09:52:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com (rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com [173.37.86.76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41FB512B1C1 for ; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 09:52:40 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=2418; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1475167960; x=1476377560; h=subject:references:to:cc:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=reST1TaUIi4YqozGS0SNI0akKVXR99YthYg2YqAWUD0=; b=kwKWSPFlM/kG+3DQnKANBBIh1e1Pdrm+fdSahznuDH7TAyMJl32+fUko 4pn0Kia0/WAOTbcqBOGOaUW/iIHJqHqLJvDHqhSjDlyW2VqImEmG4boQ4 0MmTILejFFXpNn9VaDezhHrA+YJ8qyDbhoObJDbWo0TRTR0YePtCI6G+I w=; X-Files: signature.asc : 496 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: =?us-ascii?q?A0AOBACRRu1X/4UNJK1dGgEBAQMBAQEJA?= =?us-ascii?q?QEBg0ABAQEBAR6BAY4ElVwFAYEWlCeCBoYeAoFkOBQBAgEBAQEBAQFeJ4RiAgQ?= =?us-ascii?q?jVhBNAgJNChMIAQGISa9JjGgBAQEBAQEEAQEBAQEBAQERDoVtgkeCWIUQgjiCW?= =?us-ascii?q?gWPLIpJAoNBgXaKOYFuh3qGBocKiV8eNoMdHIFvH4d6AQEB?= X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.30,415,1470700800"; d="asc'?scan'208";a="154607190" Received: from alln-core-11.cisco.com ([173.36.13.133]) by rcdn-iport-5.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 29 Sep 2016 16:52:27 +0000 Received: from [10.129.24.63] ([10.129.24.63]) by alln-core-11.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u8TGqQ2l015296; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 16:52:27 GMT References: To: json@ietf.org From: Matt Miller X-Forwarded-Message-Id: Message-ID: Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 10:52:25 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="pIiCuVlVsD9X0Bjk9qnJ1LTnfwWhe7l9Q" Archived-At: Cc: Martin Thomson Subject: [Json] Fwd: Re: Extra Review of rfc7159bis? X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 16:52:46 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --pIiCuVlVsD9X0Bjk9qnJ1LTnfwWhe7l9Q Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="aphamIhNErCJLNvAPpjfinddfU5NtgHAr"; protected-headers="v1" From: Matt Miller To: json@ietf.org Cc: Martin Thomson Message-ID: Subject: Fwd: Re: Extra Review of rfc7159bis? References: In-Reply-To: --aphamIhNErCJLNvAPpjfinddfU5NtgHAr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Here is an additional review of rfc7159bis that was received off-list from Martin Thomson. -----BEGIN REVIEW----- Firstly, why is this written as though it were an update on 4627? Does 7159 not exist? Section 6. Should this say that the exponent is a base-10 exponent. It's sort of implied, I guess. Is there any issue with leading zeros on the exponent, 1e00000 is valid apparently. Section 8.1. The MUST-strength stipulation that this be UTF-8, -16, or -32 is not strictly consistent with -404. That document only requires that the text be Unicode codepoints. That goal can be achieved with ASCII encoding. To that end, it would be reasonable to exclude -32 from this, or even add -7. Did the working group discuss this point? Section 8.2. Paving the way to DoS attacks here, aren't you? Editorial: Hiding the examples at the bottom isn't cool. -----END REVIEW----- --aphamIhNErCJLNvAPpjfinddfU5NtgHAr-- --pIiCuVlVsD9X0Bjk9qnJ1LTnfwWhe7l9Q Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJX7UbKAAoJEDWi+S0W7cO12d0H/jCk8zNFltSBOFmhKC8tu1oQ fuwibzBHuPBIjrhM3C18xj6GzaIMVJc+zTyQ2iSlZt2rxu1bn0t8U1C+w9DBOWyF re6sbfhth+ltAV35KLprjFjh4r3mqY3UZ9OMXGQtvUZ6jnBGf7u61wvfWsas1qOy 9sMLgzwrydt9JOLFP9TtYe3aFRdzoI4PCYbiEmGmS5IGIIJbRgnLUEJ0RbbybXTf dDK+35FMi5BnJxR7mRNEBpw7rCOaALKsEEAAComRDC6HT0WxlnUVYixme4khIOxG 0QuZvfzC4+ptvvq6BoyR9oI8iwZzJoD07vNXRIs89PBTmSuxPnUTtKbz356kuNE= =/6vM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --pIiCuVlVsD9X0Bjk9qnJ1LTnfwWhe7l9Q-- From nobody Thu Sep 29 12:39:06 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: json@ietf.org Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56ADD12B251; Thu, 29 Sep 2016 12:39:04 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "\"IETF Meeting Session Request Tool\"" To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.34.1 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <147517794434.18640.3225380998905209773.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 12:39:04 -0700 Archived-At: Cc: json@ietf.org, linuxwolf@outer-planes.net, jsonbis-chairs@ietf.org, aamelnikov@fastmail.fm Subject: [Json] jsonbis - Not having a session at IETF 97 X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 Sep 2016 19:39:04 -0000 Matthew Miller, a chair of the jsonbis working group, indicated that the jsonbis working group does not plan to hold a session at IETF 97. This message was generated and sent by the IETF Meeting Session Request Tool.