Re: BEEP/SOAP (Was RE: SACRED Protocol (long!))

Marshall, Mike,

(Just trying to eliminate or make specific one degree-of-freedom...)

In your opinion is there any point in sacred including sasl
elements in its payload, but still using beep as transport?

That is, this thread has mentioned the following options:

"sacred = payload + beep(sasl)"                [the current I-D]
"sacred = payload(sasl) + soap"                [mike's question]

does:

"sacred = payload(sasl) + beep" make sense or not? (To be clear:
this means using beep as transport, and not leveraging the sasl
support available in beep, but rather sending the sasl PDUs in
the sacred payload.)

If it did make sense, then one could imagine a way 'round this 
where we split into two drafts, one for payload(sasl) and one
(or more) for "sacred = draft1 + transport". However, I'm
not conviced that "sacred = payload(sasl) + beep" does
make that much sense, nor that we've sufficient bandwidth
and interest to progress multiple documents.

Stephen.


-- 
____________________________________________________________
Stephen Farrell         				   
Baltimore Technologies,   tel: (direct line) +353 1 881 6716
39 Parkgate Street,                     fax: +353 1 881 7000
Dublin 8.                mailto:[email protected]
Ireland                             http://www.baltimore.com