Binary Encodings for JavaScript Object Notation: JSON-B, JSON-C, JSON-D
draft-hallambaker-jsonbcd-20
Network Working Group P. M. Hallam-Baker
Internet-Draft 13 January 2021
Intended status: Informational
Expires: 17 July 2021
Binary Encodings for JavaScript Object Notation: JSON-B, JSON-C, JSON-D
draft-hallambaker-jsonbcd-20
Abstract
Three binary encodings for JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) are
presented. JSON-B (Binary) is a strict superset of the JSON encoding
that permits efficient binary encoding of intrinsic JavaScript data
types. JSON-C (Compact) is a strict superset of JSON-B that supports
compact representation of repeated data strings with short numeric
codes. JSON-D (Data) supports additional binary data types for
integer and floating-point representations for use in scientific
applications where conversion between binary and decimal
representations would cause a loss of precision.
This document is also available online at
http://mathmesh.com/Documents/draft-hallambaker-jsonbcd.html.
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on 17 July 2021.
Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2021 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
Hallam-Baker Expires 17 July 2021 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft JSON-B, JSON-C, JSON-D January 2021
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
and restrictions with respect to this document.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.1. Requirements Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2. Defined Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3. Related Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.4. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Extended JSON Grammar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. JSON-B . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.1. JSON-B Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. JSON-C . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5.1. JSON-C Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6. JSON-D (Data) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. JBCD Frames and Records . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
10. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
11. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
12. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1. Introduction
JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) is a simple text encoding for the
JavaScript Data model that has found wide application beyond its
original field of use. In particular JSON has rapidly become a
preferred encoding for Web Services.
JSON encoding supports just four fundamental data types (integer,
floating point, string and boolean), arrays and objects which consist
of a list of tag-value pairs.
Although the JSON encoding is sufficient for many purposes it is not
always efficient. In particular there is no efficient representation
for blocks of binary data. Use of base64 encoding increases data
volume by 33%. This overhead increases exponentially in applications
where nested binary encodings are required making use of JSON
encoding unsatisfactory in cryptographic applications where nested
binary structures are frequently required.
Hallam-Baker Expires 17 July 2021 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft JSON-B, JSON-C, JSON-D January 2021
Another source of inefficiency in JSON encoding is the repeated
occurrence of object tags. A JSON encoding containing an array of a
Show full document text