The Purple Streak, Hilarie Orman wrote:
I think the issue is that while BEEP can be made to fit our needs, as
can many other things, it seems slightly contorted, and it might well
be easier to define exactly what we need.
My concern with that approach is that we re-invent many things that
have already been adressed before, and that the WG spends lots of time
defining a transport rather than defining the actual OCP.
I don't see that BEEP provides any particular help for security.
What exactly is missing in BEEP? Could this be build on top of BEEP?
I think that we definitely need to be XML-free in the sense of being
able to write the header parsing code using a few simple, efficient C
routines. It's OK if a full-weight XML parser can also do the job -
this isn't angle bracket phobia, just a desire to spend more CPU time on
actual OPES services than on header parsing.
Is parsing a few XML messages for BEEP's channel management such a big
problem that it would justify defining an alternate protocol over an
existing one?
-Markus