IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] binary data in I-JSON

Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz> Mon, 21 July 2014 20:08 UTC

Return-Path: <lhotka@nic.cz>
X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52B6F1A03CF for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Jul 2014 13:08:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.652
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.652 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HELO_EQ_CZ=0.445, HOST_EQ_CZ=0.904, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OQxXi8Qr70qq for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Jul 2014 13:08:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.nic.cz (mail.nic.cz [IPv6:2001:1488:800:400::400]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 029781A02EF for <json@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Jul 2014 13:08:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dhcp-a243.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-a243.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.162.67]) by mail.nic.cz (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7A7DA13FACA; Mon, 21 Jul 2014 22:08:28 +0200 (CEST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=nic.cz; s=default; t=1405973309; bh=ICY+IU3euO/EDLg3VhBCUNz98pNsQ4F5wTfWz3LSLDk=; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To; b=ISiS5o1BuhdFhDFA3iaUzXZ8WFB/1yRGdvuOr+muhKkQD/MlfL9T1ylj8XOYsPKcu lXw8D6+UgUETFsP9RC941LoYF7F8VE7bL80/Zu5bI9m9f0QDTSDhYP1tOyOh1GSEGB LMkrfLSM0V+NaI7U2HxRPjz5hVPEb4+z2mASdltA=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.3 \(1878.6\))
From: Ladislav Lhotka <lhotka@nic.cz>
In-Reply-To: <E5EF9616-991C-4CE2-B783-A8ACAA96453B@tzi.org>
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 16:08:25 -0400
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <DE9F28BD-89F1-42D7-8FD2-7A779ED2A519@nic.cz>
References: <2EB7C24D-5A94-47DC-877E-E0EFC6F789BA@nic.cz> <CAHBU6iur+AQO=ZfxiZ8SkEyzJE_huuiVyP1BtbKUHpv2SGXmOg@mail.gmail.com> <E5EF9616-991C-4CE2-B783-A8ACAA96453B@tzi.org>
To: Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1878.6)
X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.98.1 at mail
X-Virus-Status: Clean
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/E6e5EtIAqN7_3beMg0_igCB_hOI
Cc: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>, JSON WG <json@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Json] binary data in I-JSON
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" <json.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/json/>
List-Post: <mailto:json@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 20:08:32 -0000

On 21 Jul 2014, at 15:49, Carsten Bormann <cabo@tzi.org> wrote:

> For this usage, base64 and base64url are exactly equivalent.
> For other usages, base64url has advantages.

Sec. 4.4 in I-JSON spec is clearly about JSON field values, and I can’t see any real advantage there.
 
> 
> If you pick one, it has to be base64url.

I guess the problem we have with sec. 4.4 of I-JSON spec is that base64url is RECOMMENDED using an RFC 2119 keyword. IMO, it should just state the properties an encoding should possess for maximum interoperability, and perhaps give base64url as an example.

Lada

> 
> Of course, then you get problems with the base64 legacy.
> You can’t win this one.  Do it right or do it compatibly.
> 
> Grüße, Carsten
> 

--
Ladislav Lhotka, CZ.NIC Labs
PGP Key ID: E74E8C0C

v2.27.8 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status