In answering DISCUSSes on BRSKI, I came up the question of do the YANG-serialization-to-JSON rules specify which base64 (original or urlsafe) encoding is to be used for "binary" types?
RFC8366 only references RFC7950, which only peripherally mentions JSON, but it
does say:
9.8.2. Lexical Representation
Binary values are encoded with the base64 encoding scheme (see
Section 4 in [RFC4648]).
9.8.3. Canonical Form
The canonical form of a binary value follows the rules of "Base 64
Encoding" in [RFC4648].
but maybe this only applies to XML-serialization.... searching further:
So, why doesn't RFC8366 reference:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc7951/
6.6. The "binary" Type
A "binary" value is represented as a JSON string -- base64 encoding
of arbitrary binary data.
The representation is identical to the lexical representation of the
"binary" type in XML; see Section 9.8 in [RFC7950].
AHA, so it should be original base64, even though the first paragraph is a
bit ambiguous, it does refer to 7950, which is not ambiguous.
I wonder if this is worth an errata clarifying this for RFC8366?
--
] Never tell me the odds! | ipv6 mesh networks [
] Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works | IoT architect [
] [email protected] http://www.sandelman.ca/ | ruby on rails [
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
-= IPv6 IoT consulting =-
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
