Re: REST, Conversations and Reliability

Dave,

I'll let Paul respond in detail, but I wanted to point something out;

On Tue, Aug 06, 2002 at 11:09:56AM -0700, David Orchard wrote:
> 2. In general, the problem with your proposal is that it combines the logic
> of the application with the logic of the reliability (message ordering) and
> conversations.  In my view, we want a separation of concerns, specifically
> separating the application from the reliability protocol.

You claimed that MQSeries is "incredibly scalable", yet I suggest that
you won't find a single well-deployed system on the Internet which uses
a reliable messaging layer for its reliability needs.  And that's not
for a lack of solutions; there have been *many* attempts at deploying
"reliable UDP" and other reliable messaging solutions at a layer below
the application layer, and all have failed.  In every case I can think
of on the Internet, application semantics include reliability semantics.

So I really think that the burden on proof is on you to show decoupling
"application logic" from "reliability logic" will work on the Internet.

Thanks.

MB
-- 
Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred)
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.               [email protected]
http://www.markbaker.ca        http://www.idokorro.com