Homogeneous IM&P vs. Heterogeneous IM&P

Folks,

Perhaps there is an easy clarification to the confusion about the goals of
CPIM.  It continues to look as if it has been trying to serve two, very
different masters.

The Heterogenous Master connects together truly independent -- ie,
heterogeneous -- services. It would be like connecting together Internet
mail, X.400, MCI Mail, DEC Mail, Lotus Mail, etc. Each was independently
developed. Different protocols and different data formats. The common
semantics is all that can be gatewayed. There must be *some* common
semantics, or else there is nothing to gateway. However, the common
semantics are pretty limited.

The Homogeneous Master uses different transport mechanisms for a single
service. In other words, the service really is end-to-end -- ie, homogeneous
-- at the user object level. This would be like connecting together a
variety of services that relay RFC822/2822 message objects, as was done for
Internet, CSNet and Bitnet email.

The Heterogeneous Master gets to dictate nothing to the end-points. The
Homogeneous Master can dictate anything in the format it wants to.

I believe that PIDF and MsgFmt are intended to serve Master Two. And that's
fine.

But CPIM, itself -- now, impp-im and impp-pres -- is intended to serve the
Homogeneous Master.

It will help working group discussions enormously to be clear about this
distinction and to use it carefully when discussing things.

d/
-- 
 Dave Crocker  <mailto:[email protected]>
 TribalWise <http://www.tribalwise.com>
 t +1.408.246.8253; f +1.408.850.1850




  [reminder: [email protected] for non-technical discussions, please]