RE: draft-ietf-impp-cpim-msgfmt syntax

At 05:36 PM 11/11/02 -0600, Adam Roach wrote:
>One of the reasons I'm sensitized to this issue comes from the
>work I've been doing recently, which involves IM over existing
>wireless networks (think 1xRTT, not 802.11b). While the wireless
>carriers are taking the remarkable step of embracing IETF
>protocols, there is a constant tension with the space inefficency
>that many such protocols introduce. When each byte is adding another
>full millisecond of latency to message transmission, you start
>counting them a little more closely. When those bytes are actively
>displacing other billable services, the pain doubles.

I have some sympathy with this.  For me, part of the way to resolve this 
kind of issue is to separate syntax from semantics.  (Though in the present 
case, we still have the goal of end to end security, which muddies the 
water somewhat.)

I think it would be possible to take either the current format OR an 
XML-based format and derive a scheme for on-the-wire compression (i.e. a 
transfer encoding) that preserves other
aspects of the format.  (I also think the use of namespaces, identified by 
URIs, has serious possibilities for generalizing such an approach, but 
that's another discussion.)

#g


-------------------
Graham Klyne
<[email protected]>




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