Re: [jose] Binary encoding for JSON

Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com> Wed, 12 June 2013 19:52 UTC

MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <079d01ce66c7$1ebd98b0$5c38ca10$@augustcellars.com>
References: <CAMm+LwjBXHK-3Lsq1o=_Hu95xyqXZTKbg0U_piiANtAWFaOF5w@mail.gmail.com> <51B74E44.7040201@stpeter.im> <079d01ce66c7$1ebd98b0$5c38ca10$@augustcellars.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 15:52:34 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMm+LwgR-5uxvXsc_d4nsJJqey5qDyK==Hetznujw8Nxhargfw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
To: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="089e0112c742dc57a604defa5a48"
Cc: "jose@ietf.org" <jose@ietf.org>, Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
Subject: Re: [jose] Binary encoding for JSON
Precedence: list

On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 1:14 PM, Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com> wrote:

> <chair>
>
> At this point only the fact that binary encodings exist is in scope for the
> WG.
>
> Any concreteness would require a charter modification.
>

Any concrete would needs be added in apps area in any case.

The reason for raising it here was simply to make people aware that there
is a binary option and to encourage anyone who might be interested in
making sure that it is suitable for use with JOSE to take a look to check
if anything was left out.

I would like to be able to use JOSE as an alternative to CMS at some point.
But not with the Base64 penalty.

-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/

Re: [jose] Binary encoding for JSON Jim Schaad
Re: [jose] Binary encoding for JSON Peter Saint-Andre
[jose] Binary encoding for JSON Phillip Hallam-Baker
Re: [jose] Binary encoding for JSON Peter Saint-Andre
Re: [jose] Binary encoding for JSON Richard Barnes
Re: [jose] Binary encoding for JSON Phillip Hallam-Baker
Re: [jose] Binary encoding for JSON Richard Barnes