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

Re: Elliotte Rusty Harold on Web Services

• To: Mark Baker <distobj@a...>
• Subject: Re: Elliotte Rusty Harold on Web Services
• From: "Alaric B. Snell" <alaric@a...>
• Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 16:03:09 +0000
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <20030210105344.K2173@w...>
• References: <57EF69AF56D92148984EDA3174082945040F9930@R...> <E18iEMD-0007Ln-00@c...> <20030210105344.K2173@w...>

On Monday 10 February 2003 15:53, Mark Baker wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2003 at 01:52:38PM +0000, Alaric B. Snell wrote:
> > But I'd far rather we just came up with a proper protocol and then based
> > HTTP on top of *that* :-)
>
> DNS was based on a "proper protocol", ONC RPC.  What did that buy it?

No it wasn't! DNS is straight on top of UDP.

> NFS, which is also based on ONC, does not interoperate with DNS in any
> way whatsoever. 

No, they don't, despite both being protocols used to fetch stuff. Neither do 
HTTP, LDAP, ODBC, IMAP, POP3, finger, ftp, tftp, fsp, etc. interoperate; yet 
all of them are based around the concept of fetching something. They were all 
designed to be too specific, trying to limit their horizons in the hope of 
spending less effort on design, but that cost was paid later in the effort of 
expanding the design...

> MB

ABS

-- 
A city is like a large, complex, rabbit
 - ARP

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Elliotte Rusty Harold on Web Services
    • From: Mark Baker <distobj@a...>

• References:
  • RE: Elliotte Rusty Harold on Web Services
    • From: "Don Box" <dbox@m...>
  • Re: Elliotte Rusty Harold on Web Services
    • From: "Alaric B. Snell" <alaric@a...>
  • Re: Elliotte Rusty Harold on Web Services
    • From: Mark Baker <distobj@a...>

• Prev by Date: RE: SML: Second Try
• Next by Date: Re: Elliotte Rusty Harold on Web Services
• Previous by thread: Re: Elliotte Rusty Harold on Web Services
• Next by thread: Re: Elliotte Rusty Harold on Web Services
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread