WSP Push Content-type | Search |
NowSMS Support Forums ⬆ WAP Technical Discussions (unsupported) ⬆ Archive through August 01, 2006 ⬆ |
◄ ► |
Author | Message | |||
Martin Persson Unregistered guest |
Hi! I have trouble understanding a part of the WSP for one particular push message. I have attached three WSPs below (with explanations of the various parts). The part that I do not really understand is in the WSP "Push si WSP Alternative 1" and it is the meaning of the 03 directly after the header length. I believe that it says "wellknown type" but then I don't understand why this 03 octet isn't part of the other attached examples... Hope someone might be able to help me. Push si WSP Alternative 1 3C060403AE81EA 3c: transaction id 06: push type 04: header length 03: wellknown type???? AE: application/vnd.wap.sic 81: wellknown charset EA: utf-8 Push si WSP alternative 2 3C0601AE 3c: transaction id 06: push type 01: header length AE: application/vnd.wap.sic DRM WSP D00603CBAF88 D0: transaction id 06: push type 03: header length CB: aaplication/vnd.oma.drm.rights+wbxml AF88: x-wap-application:drm.ua /Martin | |||
Martin Unregistered guest |
It might be that 03 is needed in order to specify the value length of the content media AE81EA because 81EA are parameters to the content type AE (according to 8.4.2.24 Content type field in WSP specification). However, if so, then why isn't there a value length in the DRM example? Might this be because AF88 isn't a parameter to the content type CB but rather another content type? /Martin | |||
Nuf Unregistered guest |
Hi Martin, I have 3 same bytes like yours: CB AF88. I can't verify those bytes. I am just curious, how do you know: CB is aplication/vnd.oma.drm.rights+wbxml AF88 is x-wap-application:drm.ua According to OMNA WSP Content Type: application/vnd.oma.drm.rights+wbxml is 4B Also according to OMA-Download-DRM-V1_0-20040615-A spec: x-wap-application:drm.ua is 08 Those bytes do not make sense to me. Anyone can help? I need to verify those bytes. I can't find any documentation on this. Regards, nuf |