The notion that encoders for constrained devices could have a problem creating deterministic CBOR is challenged by the fact that TPMs from the very beginning used DER-encoded data which is considerably more difficult than deterministic CBOR. To be sure, I have tested this extensively as well: https://github.com/cyberphone/D-CBOR/blob/main/d-cbor-4-constrained-devices.md#d-cbor-for-constrained-devices Regarding profiles, I remain unconvinced that EAT objects need - a specific and parametrized mime type - a specific CBOR type indicator in addition to a URI profile. AFAIK, a top-level URI should sufficient. Since you must understand the profile (in order to consume the object), the rest (whatever it is) is given implicitly. The same URI may also be applied to EAT objects expressed in JSON. For mime type, application/cbor respectively application/json should suffice. Thanx, Anders -- last-call mailing list last-call@xxxxxxxx https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/last-call
