• From: Steinar Bang <sb@m...>
• To: xml-dev@l...
• Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2001 12:48:34 +0200

>>>>> "Al B. Snell" <alaric@a...>:

> ...but if you're going to use TCP for RPCs, for God's sake don't use
> port 80; that's for transferring hypertext. We have 65,000 or so
> port numbers to choose from. If we use different port numbers for
> different things, firewall administrators can make networks secure
> by controlling what does and doesn't get let through.

Ah, but SOAP using port 80 is a _feature_, you know.  It allows SOAP
to _tunnel_ through the firewall.

OMG's Richard M. Soley had a very entertaining rant about this bit of
SOAP advertising at the XML Day in Oslo, last October.

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: "Binary XML" proposals
    • From: Matt Sergeant <matt@s...>
  • Re: "Binary XML" proposals
    • From: Al Snell <alaric@a...>

• References:
  • Re: "Binary XML" proposals
    • From: "Al B. Snell" <alaric@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: "Binary XML" proposals
• Next by Date: Re: "Binary XML" proposals
• Previous by thread: Re: "Binary XML" proposals
• Next by thread: Re: "Binary XML" proposals
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread