At 01:33 PM 9/10/2001, Allison Mankin wrote:
Why not use this Last Call discussion
to bring out the issues of SOAP directly over TCP rather over
BEEP
Allison,
The most simple and direct answer to your question is that the
specification that has been put forward is for using BEEP, not TCP.
Would it make sense to discuss IP over PPP when a specification for IP over
ATM were being put forward?
In addition, having a philosophical discussion about comparative approaches
is particularly dangerous when there is a detailed specification for one
approach and nothing but theory for another approach.
What remains really interesting is that all these messages have been posted
about the last call, without a single criticism of that actual contents of
the specification.
(but not over UDP, please - SOAP should not do its own
reliability)? A good reason for use of BEEP is to have
transaction multiplexing.
BEEP's multiplexing feature is, perhaps, the only aspect of it that is
"interesting" but it is far from the only reason for using the protocol.
Folks need to remember that BEEP serves to regularize a collection of
services that applications constantly and wastefully re-invent for
themselves, such as data packaging and security negotiation.
d/
----------
Dave Crocker <mailto:dcrocker(_at_)brandenburg(_dot_)com>
Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com>
tel +1.408.246.8253; fax +1.408.273.6464