Re: [apps-discuss] Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)

Nico Williams <> Thu, 23 May 2013 17:30 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id F12ED21F87B7 for <>; Thu, 23 May 2013 10:30:38 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.977
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QRR77TuLjDme for <>; Thu, 23 May 2013 10:30:23 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D0F221F8793 for <>; Thu, 23 May 2013 10:20:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id D55062AC06A for <>; Thu, 23 May 2013 10:20:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( []) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: by (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8860A2AC059 for <>; Thu, 23 May 2013 10:20:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id m46so2292458wev.10 for <>; Thu, 23 May 2013 10:20:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=nMtNIqBJOaZVpq9ZWihLTnumzd0s3BilcK7Ny31VJCs=; b=BdbXl/N+paWd7Aym6HpBGOId4MIWWn1wWwESTfTqQ1UsqsNoGGsvmro9+K4mp7l8YV N9nXUyV5/uE0V0w7K6uVMg2EiF+QV1/IUD0BPAZ5qrmX2wagt6iYUnM/kTF/b5v+lw29 kOFqD4YBI+T9w1/oznJe8vyyV+3YL1ryXyFxf5eSvj8LuSKUAyZnt9ziXcFweD96skiY LcQdz+Kms9+52Nl0FZVO/Xl4dQhWqwg++NKxz48x7jg/Zs7hE/iHcClU8R0vebpKuIe7 E0j7TBsTEnJgdML7X3q+p8yrqlD2wdHWg0PDnVvl74tNZhy43WnOF/1dMAqfHZl1EqER DSdQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id li14mr45011676wic.33.1369329594443; Thu, 23 May 2013 10:19:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Thu, 23 May 2013 10:19:54 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <>
Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 12:19:54 -0500
Message-ID: <>
From: Nico Williams <>
To: Carsten Bormann <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Cc: Paul Hoffman <>,
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Concise Binary Object Representation (CBOR)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 May 2013 17:30:39 -0000

On Thu, May 23, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Carsten Bormann <> wrote:
> On May 23, 2013, at 18:13, Nico Williams <> wrote:
>> Also, I believe this is the fifth binary encoding of JSON proposed
>> thus far.
> 1) CBOR is not a "binary encoding of JSON".
> (It can be used as one, though.)

The superset of JSON in CBOR is not in itself appealing enough, I
think.  We already have a *lot* of binary encodings.

It's only the connection to JSON that makes this appealing.  You might
disagree, but you're probably biased :)  You're asking that we
standardize this though, so you should do something to justify one
more encoding in a sea of encodings.

> 2) There are many more proposals in this space, and it is hard to draw a line.
> E.g. Google protocol buffers is a prominent example.

But it requires a schema.  (And what the heck was so wrong with PER?
But whatever.)

>> An analysis of these might be nice.
> Yes.  Find a grad student :-)

I think it falls on you to provide some justification for this.  It
wouldn't be hard, but you might find that an existing, *deployed*
encoding is good enough (or maybe you wouldn't but we would).  I think
I'd rather standardize a good-enough encoding that's been deployed
than create a new one, but maybe the improvements CBOR brings are
compelling enough.  Either way you should definitely provide some

> Of course, I did my own analysis, but I didn't see a need to write it up.

That's... odd.  You need consensus.  Why wouldn't your analysis help you get it?

> (More specifically, I didn't see a funding agency interested in this part of reality.
> But I'm willing to be surprised :-)

Do you intend to use CBOR for any protocols you want standardized at
the IETF?  Or are you just hoping others will?