ISO 8583
link untuk yang mau belajar
link asli
http://jimmod.com/blog/2011/07/jimmys-blog-iso-8583-introduction-beginners-tutorial/
Financial transaction is communication between 2 system through socket connection.
After connection established, each system can send message in ISO 8583 format
which
commonly will be request and the other system will response.
From my experience the communication will be start with
sign on and then the financial transactions.
Periodically an echo message is send to make sure the other system is still alive.
If I break down the flow:
System A open connection to System B (through specific IP and Port).
Connection established.
System A send Sign-On request message.
System B send Sign-on response message.
System A will start send Echo request message periodically (e.g every 1 minute).
System B will send Echo response message when receive Echo request message.
When financial transaction happen, System A will send Transaction request message.
Then System B will send Transaction response message.
If something wrong happen (usually timeout so System A didn’t get the response),
System A will send Reversal request message to cancel the previous transaction.
System B will send Reversal response message.
I hope my explaination give clear basic understanding about the flow.
Next the question will be what’s this ISO 8583 message looks like.
We can separate the message into 3 parts:
Message Type Identifier
Bitmaps
Data Elements
Message Type Identifier
Message Type Identifier or MTI is 4 digits numeric that describe the message type.
It will explain the message function.
Commonly used:
- 02xx : Financial Message (e.g 0200 for request, 0210 for response)
- 04xx : Reversal Message (e.g 0400 for request, 0410 for response)
- 08xx : Network Management Message (e.g 0800 for request, 0810 for response)
*
I found more detail & complete list at wikipedia
Bitmaps
Bitmaps is field that contain information about which data element is presence or absence. Based on the variant it could be 16 hexadecimal characters.
An example will make it clear.
The bitmap is:
B220000000100000
If we break down to binary (I hope you understand how to convert hexadecimal to binary:) :
1011001000100000000000000000000000000000000100000000000000000000
Since I’m nice I create graphical illustration.
You can see that in this bitmap it explain that data element in the message is 1, 3, 4, 7, 11.
There’s special meaning of first bit of bitmap, if it has value of 1 that mean there’s secondary bitmap.
And what the hell is this secondary bitmap?
Since 16 hexadecimal characters will can only contain info of 64 data element, some transactions contain data element number 64 – 128. That mean the 16 hexadecimal characters is not sufficient.
With set the first bit to ‘1′ that will inform there’s additional bitmap, which is another 16 hexadecimal characters.
So in this case the full bitmap example should be:
B2200000001000000000000000800000
Convert to binary:
10110010001000000000000000000000000000000001000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000100000000000000000000000
From the bitmap, data element presence in the message : 3, 4, 7, 11, 105.
Data Elements
Data Elements is the essense of the whole ISO message, contain information about the transaction (transaction type, amount, customer id, etc).
Each data element have their on format, attribute and length.
Each data element number also have standard purpose, for example DE #4 is transaction amount.
I will explain based on the example above, since this is only introduction I don’t want to confuse beginner reader. In wikipedia there’s full list.
For our examples, the data element list:
#3 – Processing code – n 6
#4 – Transaction amount – n 12
#7 – Transmission date & time – n 10
#11 – Systems trace audit number – n 6
#44 – Additional response data – an ..25
#105 – Reserved for ISO use – ans …999
To make it practical let’s just use example.
We want to send :
DE #3 : 201234
DE #4 : 10000
DE #7 : 1107221830
DE #11 : 123456
DE #44 : A5DFGR
DE #105 : ABCDEFGHIJ 1234567890
Using above value, the data in data elements :
ISO8583 - de
Based on the type each value will be formatted.
a : alpha (including blanks)
n : numeric value
s : special characters
x (no dot) : length is x (fixed)
.x (one dot) : max length is x (1 digit in front as length info)
..xx (two dot) : max length is xx (2 digit in front as length info)
…xxx (three dot) : max length is xxx (3 digit in front as length info)
ISO Message
From above examples the whole ISO message will be :
0200B2200000001000000000000000800000201234000000010000110722183012345606A5DFGR021ABCDEFGHIJ 1234567890
Friday, June 15, 2012
Thursday, February 09, 2012
Tuesday, February 07, 2012
Monday, October 03, 2011
Thursday, May 06, 2010
Pikiran dan Sikap Steve Jobs tentang Flash
link asli http://www.apple.com/hotnews/thoughts-on-flash/
fakta kenapa apple tidak bisa flash di iphone, ipad , ipod.
Thoughts on Flash
Apple has a long relationship with Adobe. In fact, we met Adobe’s
founders when they were in their proverbial garage. Apple was their
first big customer, adopting their Postscript language for our new
Laserwriter printer. Apple invested in Adobe and owned around 20% of
the company for many years. The two companies worked closely together
to pioneer desktop publishing and there were many good times. Since
that golden era, the companies have grown apart. Apple went through
its near death experience, and Adobe was drawn to the corporate market
with their Acrobat products. Today the two companies still work
together to serve their joint creative customers – Mac users buy
around half of Adobe’s Creative Suite products – but beyond that there
are few joint interests.
I wanted to jot down some of our thoughts on Adobe’s Flash products so
that customers and critics may better understand why we do not allow
Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. Adobe has characterized our
decision as being primarily business driven – they say we want to
protect our App Store – but in reality it is based on technology
issues. Adobe claims that we are a closed system, and that Flash is
open, but in fact the opposite is true. Let me explain.
First, there’s “Open”.
Adobe’s Flash products are 100% proprietary. They are only available
from Adobe, and Adobe has sole authority as to their future
enhancement, pricing, etc. While Adobe’s Flash products are widely
available, this does not mean they are open, since they are controlled
entirely by Adobe and available only from Adobe. By almost any
definition, Flash is a closed system.
Apple has many proprietary products too. Though the operating system
for the iPhone, iPod and iPad is proprietary, we strongly believe that
all standards pertaining to the web should be open. Rather than use
Flash, Apple has adopted HTML5, CSS and JavaScript – all open
standards. Apple’s mobile devices all ship with high performance, low
power implementations of these open standards. HTML5, the new web
standard that has been adopted by Apple, Google and many others, lets
web developers create advanced graphics, typography, animations and
transitions without relying on third party browser plug-ins (like
Flash). HTML5 is completely open and controlled by a standards
committee, of which Apple is a member.
Apple even creates open standards for the web. For example, Apple
began with a small open source project and created WebKit, a complete
open-source HTML5 rendering engine that is the heart of the Safari web
browser used in all our products. WebKit has been widely adopted.
Google uses it for Android’s browser, Palm uses it, Nokia uses it, and
RIM (Blackberry) has announced they will use it too. Almost every
smartphone web browser other than Microsoft’s uses WebKit. By making
its WebKit technology open, Apple has set the standard for mobile web
browsers.
Second, there’s the “full web”.
Adobe has repeatedly said that Apple mobile devices cannot access “the
full web” because 75% of video on the web is in Flash. What they don’t
say is that almost all this video is also available in a more modern
format, H.264, and viewable on iPhones, iPods and iPads. YouTube, with
an estimated 40% of the web’s video, shines in an app bundled on all
Apple mobile devices, with the iPad offering perhaps the best YouTube
discovery and viewing experience ever. Add to this video from Vimeo,
Netflix, Facebook, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, ESPN, NPR, Time,
The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Sports Illustrated,
People, National Geographic, and many, many others. iPhone, iPod and
iPad users aren’t missing much video.
Another Adobe claim is that Apple devices cannot play Flash games.
This is true. Fortunately, there are over 50,000 games and
entertainment titles on the App Store, and many of them are free.
There are more games and entertainment titles available for iPhone,
iPod and iPad than for any other platform in the world.
Third, there’s reliability, security and performance.
Symantec recently highlighted Flash for having one of the worst
security records in 2009. We also know first hand that Flash is the
number one reason Macs crash. We have been working with Adobe to fix
these problems, but they have persisted for several years now. We
don’t want to reduce the reliability and security of our iPhones,
iPods and iPads by adding Flash.
In addition, Flash has not performed well on mobile devices. We have
routinely asked Adobe to show us Flash performing well on a mobile
device, any mobile device, for a few years now. We have never seen it.
Adobe publicly said that Flash would ship on a smartphone in early
2009, then the second half of 2009, then the first half of 2010, and
now they say the second half of 2010. We think it will eventually
ship, but we’re glad we didn’t hold our breath. Who knows how it will
perform?
Fourth, there’s battery life.
To achieve long battery life when playing video, mobile devices must
decode the video in hardware; decoding it in software uses too much
power. Many of the chips used in modern mobile devices contain a
decoder called H.264 – an industry standard that is used in every
Blu-ray DVD player and has been adopted by Apple, Google (YouTube),
Vimeo, Netflix and many other companies.
Although Flash has recently added support for H.264, the video on
almost all Flash websites currently requires an older generation
decoder that is not implemented in mobile chips and must be run in
software. The difference is striking: on an iPhone, for example, H.264
videos play for up to 10 hours, while videos decoded in software play
for less than 5 hours before the battery is fully drained.
When websites re-encode their videos using H.264, they can offer them
without using Flash at all. They play perfectly in browsers like
Apple’s Safari and Google’s Chrome without any plugins whatsoever, and
look great on iPhones, iPods and iPads.
Fifth, there’s Touch.
Flash was designed for PCs using mice, not for touch screens using
fingers. For example, many Flash websites rely on “rollovers”, which
pop up menus or other elements when the mouse arrow hovers over a
specific spot. Apple’s revolutionary multi-touch interface doesn’t use
a mouse, and there is no concept of a rollover. Most Flash websites
will need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices. If
developers need to rewrite their Flash websites, why not use modern
technologies like HTML5, CSS and JavaScript?
Even if iPhones, iPods and iPads ran Flash, it would not solve the
problem that most Flash websites need to be rewritten to support
touch-based devices.
Sixth, the most important reason.
Besides the fact that Flash is closed and proprietary, has major
technical drawbacks, and doesn’t support touch based devices, there is
an even more important reason we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods
and iPads. We have discussed the downsides of using Flash to play
video and interactive content from websites, but Adobe also wants
developers to adopt Flash to create apps that run on our mobile
devices.
We know from painful experience that letting a third party layer of
software come between the platform and the developer ultimately
results in sub-standard apps and hinders the enhancement and progress
of the platform. If developers grow dependent on third party
development libraries and tools, they can only take advantage of
platform enhancements if and when the third party chooses to adopt the
new features. We cannot be at the mercy of a third party deciding if
and when they will make our enhancements available to our developers.
This becomes even worse if the third party is supplying a cross
platform development tool. The third party may not adopt enhancements
from one platform unless they are available on all of their supported
platforms. Hence developers only have access to the lowest common
denominator set of features. Again, we cannot accept an outcome where
developers are blocked from using our innovations and enhancements
because they are not available on our competitor’s platforms.
Flash is a cross platform development tool. It is not Adobe’s goal to
help developers write the best iPhone, iPod and iPad apps. It is their
goal to help developers write cross platform apps. And Adobe has been
painfully slow to adopt enhancements to Apple’s platforms. For
example, although Mac OS X has been shipping for almost 10 years now,
Adobe just adopted it fully (Cocoa) two weeks ago when they shipped
CS5. Adobe was the last major third party developer to fully adopt Mac
OS X.
Our motivation is simple – we want to provide the most advanced and
innovative platform to our developers, and we want them to stand
directly on the shoulders of this platform and create the best apps
the world has ever seen. We want to continually enhance the platform
so developers can create even more amazing, powerful, fun and useful
applications. Everyone wins – we sell more devices because we have the
best apps, developers reach a wider and wider audience and customer
base, and users are continually delighted by the best and broadest
selection of apps on any platform.
Conclusions.
Flash was created during the PC era – for PCs and mice. Flash is a
successful business for Adobe, and we can understand why they want to
push it beyond PCs. But the mobile era is about low power devices,
touch interfaces and open web standards – all areas where Flash falls
short.
The avalanche of media outlets offering their content for Apple’s
mobile devices demonstrates that Flash is no longer necessary to watch
video or consume any kind of web content. And the 200,000 apps on
Apple’s App Store proves that Flash isn’t necessary for tens of
thousands of developers to create graphically rich applications,
including games.
New open standards created in the mobile era, such as HTML5, will win
on mobile devices (and PCs too). Perhaps Adobe should focus more on
creating great HTML5 tools for the future, and less on criticizing
Apple for leaving the past behind.
Steve Jobs
April, 2010
fakta kenapa apple tidak bisa flash di iphone, ipad , ipod.
Thoughts on Flash
Apple has a long relationship with Adobe. In fact, we met Adobe’s
founders when they were in their proverbial garage. Apple was their
first big customer, adopting their Postscript language for our new
Laserwriter printer. Apple invested in Adobe and owned around 20% of
the company for many years. The two companies worked closely together
to pioneer desktop publishing and there were many good times. Since
that golden era, the companies have grown apart. Apple went through
its near death experience, and Adobe was drawn to the corporate market
with their Acrobat products. Today the two companies still work
together to serve their joint creative customers – Mac users buy
around half of Adobe’s Creative Suite products – but beyond that there
are few joint interests.
I wanted to jot down some of our thoughts on Adobe’s Flash products so
that customers and critics may better understand why we do not allow
Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. Adobe has characterized our
decision as being primarily business driven – they say we want to
protect our App Store – but in reality it is based on technology
issues. Adobe claims that we are a closed system, and that Flash is
open, but in fact the opposite is true. Let me explain.
First, there’s “Open”.
Adobe’s Flash products are 100% proprietary. They are only available
from Adobe, and Adobe has sole authority as to their future
enhancement, pricing, etc. While Adobe’s Flash products are widely
available, this does not mean they are open, since they are controlled
entirely by Adobe and available only from Adobe. By almost any
definition, Flash is a closed system.
Apple has many proprietary products too. Though the operating system
for the iPhone, iPod and iPad is proprietary, we strongly believe that
all standards pertaining to the web should be open. Rather than use
Flash, Apple has adopted HTML5, CSS and JavaScript – all open
standards. Apple’s mobile devices all ship with high performance, low
power implementations of these open standards. HTML5, the new web
standard that has been adopted by Apple, Google and many others, lets
web developers create advanced graphics, typography, animations and
transitions without relying on third party browser plug-ins (like
Flash). HTML5 is completely open and controlled by a standards
committee, of which Apple is a member.
Apple even creates open standards for the web. For example, Apple
began with a small open source project and created WebKit, a complete
open-source HTML5 rendering engine that is the heart of the Safari web
browser used in all our products. WebKit has been widely adopted.
Google uses it for Android’s browser, Palm uses it, Nokia uses it, and
RIM (Blackberry) has announced they will use it too. Almost every
smartphone web browser other than Microsoft’s uses WebKit. By making
its WebKit technology open, Apple has set the standard for mobile web
browsers.
Second, there’s the “full web”.
Adobe has repeatedly said that Apple mobile devices cannot access “the
full web” because 75% of video on the web is in Flash. What they don’t
say is that almost all this video is also available in a more modern
format, H.264, and viewable on iPhones, iPods and iPads. YouTube, with
an estimated 40% of the web’s video, shines in an app bundled on all
Apple mobile devices, with the iPad offering perhaps the best YouTube
discovery and viewing experience ever. Add to this video from Vimeo,
Netflix, Facebook, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, ESPN, NPR, Time,
The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Sports Illustrated,
People, National Geographic, and many, many others. iPhone, iPod and
iPad users aren’t missing much video.
Another Adobe claim is that Apple devices cannot play Flash games.
This is true. Fortunately, there are over 50,000 games and
entertainment titles on the App Store, and many of them are free.
There are more games and entertainment titles available for iPhone,
iPod and iPad than for any other platform in the world.
Third, there’s reliability, security and performance.
Symantec recently highlighted Flash for having one of the worst
security records in 2009. We also know first hand that Flash is the
number one reason Macs crash. We have been working with Adobe to fix
these problems, but they have persisted for several years now. We
don’t want to reduce the reliability and security of our iPhones,
iPods and iPads by adding Flash.
In addition, Flash has not performed well on mobile devices. We have
routinely asked Adobe to show us Flash performing well on a mobile
device, any mobile device, for a few years now. We have never seen it.
Adobe publicly said that Flash would ship on a smartphone in early
2009, then the second half of 2009, then the first half of 2010, and
now they say the second half of 2010. We think it will eventually
ship, but we’re glad we didn’t hold our breath. Who knows how it will
perform?
Fourth, there’s battery life.
To achieve long battery life when playing video, mobile devices must
decode the video in hardware; decoding it in software uses too much
power. Many of the chips used in modern mobile devices contain a
decoder called H.264 – an industry standard that is used in every
Blu-ray DVD player and has been adopted by Apple, Google (YouTube),
Vimeo, Netflix and many other companies.
Although Flash has recently added support for H.264, the video on
almost all Flash websites currently requires an older generation
decoder that is not implemented in mobile chips and must be run in
software. The difference is striking: on an iPhone, for example, H.264
videos play for up to 10 hours, while videos decoded in software play
for less than 5 hours before the battery is fully drained.
When websites re-encode their videos using H.264, they can offer them
without using Flash at all. They play perfectly in browsers like
Apple’s Safari and Google’s Chrome without any plugins whatsoever, and
look great on iPhones, iPods and iPads.
Fifth, there’s Touch.
Flash was designed for PCs using mice, not for touch screens using
fingers. For example, many Flash websites rely on “rollovers”, which
pop up menus or other elements when the mouse arrow hovers over a
specific spot. Apple’s revolutionary multi-touch interface doesn’t use
a mouse, and there is no concept of a rollover. Most Flash websites
will need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices. If
developers need to rewrite their Flash websites, why not use modern
technologies like HTML5, CSS and JavaScript?
Even if iPhones, iPods and iPads ran Flash, it would not solve the
problem that most Flash websites need to be rewritten to support
touch-based devices.
Sixth, the most important reason.
Besides the fact that Flash is closed and proprietary, has major
technical drawbacks, and doesn’t support touch based devices, there is
an even more important reason we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods
and iPads. We have discussed the downsides of using Flash to play
video and interactive content from websites, but Adobe also wants
developers to adopt Flash to create apps that run on our mobile
devices.
We know from painful experience that letting a third party layer of
software come between the platform and the developer ultimately
results in sub-standard apps and hinders the enhancement and progress
of the platform. If developers grow dependent on third party
development libraries and tools, they can only take advantage of
platform enhancements if and when the third party chooses to adopt the
new features. We cannot be at the mercy of a third party deciding if
and when they will make our enhancements available to our developers.
This becomes even worse if the third party is supplying a cross
platform development tool. The third party may not adopt enhancements
from one platform unless they are available on all of their supported
platforms. Hence developers only have access to the lowest common
denominator set of features. Again, we cannot accept an outcome where
developers are blocked from using our innovations and enhancements
because they are not available on our competitor’s platforms.
Flash is a cross platform development tool. It is not Adobe’s goal to
help developers write the best iPhone, iPod and iPad apps. It is their
goal to help developers write cross platform apps. And Adobe has been
painfully slow to adopt enhancements to Apple’s platforms. For
example, although Mac OS X has been shipping for almost 10 years now,
Adobe just adopted it fully (Cocoa) two weeks ago when they shipped
CS5. Adobe was the last major third party developer to fully adopt Mac
OS X.
Our motivation is simple – we want to provide the most advanced and
innovative platform to our developers, and we want them to stand
directly on the shoulders of this platform and create the best apps
the world has ever seen. We want to continually enhance the platform
so developers can create even more amazing, powerful, fun and useful
applications. Everyone wins – we sell more devices because we have the
best apps, developers reach a wider and wider audience and customer
base, and users are continually delighted by the best and broadest
selection of apps on any platform.
Conclusions.
Flash was created during the PC era – for PCs and mice. Flash is a
successful business for Adobe, and we can understand why they want to
push it beyond PCs. But the mobile era is about low power devices,
touch interfaces and open web standards – all areas where Flash falls
short.
The avalanche of media outlets offering their content for Apple’s
mobile devices demonstrates that Flash is no longer necessary to watch
video or consume any kind of web content. And the 200,000 apps on
Apple’s App Store proves that Flash isn’t necessary for tens of
thousands of developers to create graphically rich applications,
including games.
New open standards created in the mobile era, such as HTML5, will win
on mobile devices (and PCs too). Perhaps Adobe should focus more on
creating great HTML5 tools for the future, and less on criticizing
Apple for leaving the past behind.
Steve Jobs
April, 2010
Monday, March 15, 2010
Friday, March 05, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
