Telechat Review of draft-ietf-cbor-array-tags-07

Request Review of draft-ietf-cbor-array-tags
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 08)
Type Telechat Review
Team Internet of Things Directorate (iotdir)
Deadline 2019-10-02
Requested 2019-09-17
Requested by Éric Vyncke
Authors Carsten Bormann
Draft last updated 2019-10-02
Completed reviews Secdir Last Call review of -07 by Steve Hanna (diff)
Genart Last Call review of -07 by Elwyn Davies (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -07 by Linda Dunbar (diff)
Iotdir Telechat review of -07 by Henk Birkholz (diff)
Dear IoT directorate,

As this document is important for the IoT world, I would appreciate to receive a review with IoT in mind.

Thank you very much in advance


PS: please note the telechat date of October 3rd to schedule the review ;-)
Assignment Reviewer Henk Birkholz
State Completed
Review review-ietf-cbor-array-tags-07-iotdir-telechat-birkholz-2019-10-02
Posted at
Reviewed rev. 07 (document currently at 08)
Review result Ready
Review completed: 2019-10-02


Hi authors,
hi list,

I am the assigned IoT Directorate reviewer for I-D.ietf-cbor-array-tags.

Please treat this review as you would treat any other WGLC comment.

The document defines 26 IANA CBOR tag numbers in the specification-required space and one tag number in the first-come-first-served space. The tags enable the use of typed, multidimensional, and homogeneous arrays in the CBOR (RFC 7049) enabling multiple compinations of array composition. Serialization of corresponding CBOR arrays is defined in text and complemented with comprehensive summaries in table format. The specified CBOR tags provide convenience functions (e.g. retaining endianness) that reduce workflow complexity and are eliminating unnecessary serialization overhead in comparison to the original array tag specified in RFC 7049.

This document provides significant improvements for the conveyance of various types of structured data processed by things of any size.

The document is well written, comprehensible, and concise. Various nits have been resolved based on other WGLC comments.

The tag specification uses CBOR examples (figures) that sightly diverge from the style used RFC 7049. The style used is in this document is an improvement with respect to readability and is consistent with other documents.

The document is ready for approval.

Viele Grüße,