ietf
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Last Call: Using SOAP in BEEP to Proposed Standard

2001-09-10 19:40:04
Dave,

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. 
 

You mistake my intent in the question - I think this discussion
is serving to increase community awareness of the valuable 
functions of BEEP, the whole range of them, of which I mentioned
only one, multiplexing.  There was a lot of review of BEEP by IESG
as it went to Proposed Standard, and I share Ned's view that it is
a very useful protocol/application structure.  So my comment was
not intended to support a naked TCP mapping of SOAP.

TCP (or SCTP) fulfils critical reliability and congestion control 
functions under BEEP, hence my statement against a UDP mapping.

Would it make sense to discuss IP over PPP when a specification for IP over  
ATM were being put forward? 

Purely with respect to the architecture discussion, yes -
there should be commonalities and consistency of the big
picture.  But any more about IP over foo would be digressive.

Allison



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>