[Sis-dtn] Canonical CBOR in BPv7 a MUST for block field encoding?

[Dr. Keith L Scott]

The draft-31 spec says:


Cryptographic verification of a block is possible only if the

   sequence of octets on which the verifying node computes its hash -

   the canonicalized representation of the block - is identical to the

   sequence of octets on which the hash declared for that block was

   computed.  To ensure that blocks are always in canonical

   representation when they are transmitted and received, the CBOR

   representations of the values of all fields in all blocks must

   conform to the rules for Canonical CBOR as specified in [RFC8949<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc8949>].

Note the non-capitalization of the MUST requirement.  Was that intended to be capitalized (and is it in the version that the RFC editor sent back)?  What are folks thoughts on capitalizing it as part of AUTH48?

                                v/r,

                                --keith


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sis-dtn/attachments/20211201/3750b602/attachment.htm>