Anders Rundgren added the comment:
> Antoine Pitrou added the comment:
>
> I won't claim to know/understand the specifics, but "message payload in
> base64" actually sounds reasonable to me, if far from optimal (both from
> readibility and space overhead POV) :-).
It is indeed a working solution. I do though think that communities that
previously used XML would accept base64-encoded messages. It becomes really
messy when applied to counter-signed messages like the following:
{
"@context": "http://xmlns.webpki.org/wcpp-payment-demo";,
"@qualifier": "AuthData",
"paymentRequest":
{
"commonName": "Demo Merchant",
"amount": 8600550,
"currency": "USD",
"referenceId": "#1000000",
"dateTime": "2014-12-18T13:39:35Z",
"signature":
{
"algorithm": "RS256",
"signerCertificate":
{
"issuer": "CN=Merchant Network Sub CA5,C=DE",
"serialNumber": "1413983542582",
"subject": "CN=Demo Merchant,2.5.4.5=#1306383936333235,C=DE"
},
"certificatePath":
[
"MIIDQzCCAiugAwIBAgIGAUk3_J02M...eMGlY734U3NasQfAhTUhxrdDbphEvsWTc",
"MIIEPzCCAiegAwIBAgIBBTANBgkqh...gU1IyRGA7IbdHOeDB2RUpsXloU2QKfLrk"
],
"value":
"Ny4Qe6FQhd5_qcSc3xiH8Kt7tIZ9Z...9LEjC6_Rulg_G20fGxJ-wzezFpsAGbmuFQg"
}
},
"domainName": "merchant.com",
"cardType": "SuperCard",
"pan": "1618342124919252",
"dateTime": "2014-12-18T13:40:59Z",
"signature":
{
"algorithm": "RS256",
"signerCertificate":
{
"issuer": "CN=Mybank Client Root CA1,C=US",
"serialNumber": "1413983550045",
"subject": "CN=The Cardholder,2.5.4.5=#13083935363733353232"
},
"certificatePath":
["MIIENzCCAh-gAwIBAgIGAUk3_LpdM...IGcN1md5feo5DndNnV8D0UM-oBRkUDDFiWlhCU"],
"value":
"wyUcFcHmvM5ZozZKOEwOQkYic0D7M...S_HbaPGau5KfZjCaksvb5U1lYZaXxP8kAbuGPQ"
}
}
----------
_______________________________________
Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org>
<http://bugs.python.org/issue23123>
_______________________________________
_______________________________________________
Python-bugs-list mailing list
Unsubscribe:
https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
