- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2002 14:30:18 -0400
- To: Walden Mathews <waldenm@ilx.com>
- Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
On Wed, Jul 10, 2002 at 11:36:03AM -0400, Walden Mathews wrote: > > Perhaps, but I doubt it. Any use of "reliable messaging" I've seen > > assumes that its job is to make the cruel and nasty network look (to > > varying degrees) less cruel and nasty. It is this premise that I > > believe is fundamentally flawed. > > Mark, this I don't get. TCP certainly makes a datagram network look > "less cruel and nasty", if you're in the right market. And HTTP standard > implementation is over TCP, not UDP (I've read up on experimental hybrid > stuff). Unless I misunderstand, REST is built upon a level of reliability, > and it sounds like the same level of reliability being discussed here. Yes, perhaps I wasn't clear that I was talking about messaging. TCP addresses a much more specialized form of reliability than reliable messaging (I assume this is what you meant by "in the right market"?), as it is only a point-to-point, connection based solution. By not trying to solve the general reliable, any-to-any, extensible QoS problem, TCP became a workable solution, and has actually become even more general over time through extension (though still not world- beating 8-). MB -- Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred) Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. distobj@acm.org http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.idokorro.com
Received on Wednesday, 10 July 2002 14:18:57 UTC