W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-discuss@w3.org > December 2001

Re: Requirements for reliable message delivery

From: John Ibbotson <john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 08:53:51 +0000
To: Brian E Carpenter <brian@hursley.ibm.com>
Cc: Bill Janssen <bill@janssen.org>, Discuss Apps <discuss@apps.ietf.org>, Jim Gettys <jg@pa.dec.com>, Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>, "Marshall T. Rose" <mrose+mtr.netnews@dbc.mtview.ca.us>
Message-ID: <OF4E956283.20153B45-ON80256B18.0030D571@portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>

And there are many exchange models other than RPC ......

XML Technology and Messaging,
IBM UK Ltd, Hursley Park,
Winchester, SO21 2JN

Tel: (work) +44 (0)1962 815188        (home) +44 (0)1722 781271
Fax: +44 (0)1962 816898
Notes Id: John Ibbotson/UK/IBM
email: john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com

                    Brian E                                                                                   
                    Carpenter            To:     Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>                                  
                    <brian@hursley       cc:     Bill Janssen <bill@janssen.org>, Jim Gettys <jg@pa.dec.com>, 
                    .ibm.com>             "Marshall T. Rose" <mrose+mtr.netnews@dbc.mtview.ca.us>, Discuss    
                                          Apps <discuss@apps.ietf.org>                                        
                    11/29/2001           Subject:     Re: Requirements for reliable message delivery          
                    12:16 PM                                                                                  

Eliot Lear wrote:
> In the vast volume o this discussion I lost something somewhere.  Why
> BEEP a good college try at a decent baseline upon which strong RPC could
> written?

Well, the draft we were originally discussing attempts to answer this.
> And why are we pissing and moaning rather than either fixing SOAP or
> up with an alternative?

The draft attempts to list requirements, not exactly for fixing SOAP,
but making it unnecessary to fix it. [i.e. fix the Post Office rather
than the envelope.]

Received on Tuesday, 4 December 2001 10:53:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 16 July 2018 05:57:00 UTC