RE: The deep difference between request/response and fire-and-forget
"David Orchard" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.text.xml.distributed |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Well, good luck getting a charter passed for specifying a MEP that can't be supported by HTTP and would only be used by a single protocol that is at the IETF and that the IETF group has never said to us that they need. Dave ________________________________ From: David Hull [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Monday, January 23, 2006 9:29 PM To: David Orchard Cc: Rich Salz; [email protected] Subject: Re: The deep difference between request/response and fire-and-forget I'm strongly against standardizing any MEP that can't be deployed on HTTP. That would be very very strange to standardize an MEP and not standardize any bindings for that MEP. It doesn't pass the giggle test at all.. That doesn't pass my giggle test. Do what now? HTTP is the only protocol in the world? Standardize a one-way MEP, bind it to XMPP <message/> and I promise I won't giggle a bit.