Re: SOAP/XML Protocol and filtering, etc.

Dick Brooks wrote:

> How is what I've described all that different from inetd? Consider:
>
> |ftp|telnet|finger|    |ebXML|GISB|AIAGE5|AS2|
> |      inetd      |    |   message broker    |
> |       TCP       |    |       HTTP          |
>    ........                 ...........
>
> What's unclean about this approach, it enables centralized administration,
> single security domains, workflow management, a single "choke point" for
> security purposes. The "handlers" are in fact separate and distinct layers
> from the message broker.
Inetd uses only the port number - the address provided by the TCP 
and UDP layers below it - to make its decision.
What is not clear (to me at least) is why the URI isn't enough to 
make the decision - that is the address of the resource above the 
HTTP layer.  I don't see why administering and managing SOAPAction 
headers and Content-Types and whatever else is easier than 
adminstering URIs.
--
Scott Lawrence      Architect            slawrence(_at_)virata(_dot_)com
Virata       Embedded Web Technology    http://www.emweb.com/