[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: MS thinks HTTP Needs Replacing???

• To: <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: MS thinks HTTP Needs Replacing???
• From: Bill de hÓra <dehora@e...>
• Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 15:22:51 -0000
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <3C7CA3C5.20840.16DB9905@localhost>

 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrzej Jan Taramina [mailto:andrzej@c...]
> 
> One easy way to solve this problem is by decoupling the
> request from the 
> response.  Send a request (with an indication of how to 
> respond....a URL, Web 
> Services Callback, and email address etc.) and receive a
> "transaction  received" HTTP response (which should be almost
> immediate).  
> Some time 
> later the service uses the response indicator info to send a 
> "real" response to 
> the transaction.  Damn....that sure sounds like message 
> queuing doesn't it?
> 
> Box's implication is that HTTP should do this for you.  I
> disagree. Someone 
> said that it is best not to hide network plumbing issues from 
> developers (due to 
> latency, unreliability, etc.)

Jim Waldo, amongst others. 

On the other hand decoupling QOS from transports, whereby a
protocol allowed an application to specify to a transport service
the terms and constraints under which a message or message sequence
must be sent would be a useful abstraction. 

Bill de hÓra


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 7.0.4

iQA/AwUBPHz5yOaWiFwg2CH4EQK4+QCg4u540nJifyoO02kYpm0u62IJG7MAoI5Z
dpMkM9Ia5Mbr2yHTL1xT3S1T
=JFdS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

• References:
  • RE: MS thinks HTTP Needs Replacing???
    • From: "Andrzej Jan Taramina" <andrzej@c...>

• Prev by Date: RE: MS thinks HTTP Needs Replacing???
• Next by Date: REST as RPC done right
• Previous by thread: RE: MS thinks HTTP Needs Replacing???
• Next by thread: RE: MS thinks HTTP Needs Replacing???
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread