W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > February 2003

RE: Visibility (was Re: Introducing the Service Oriented Architec tural style, and it's constraints and properties.

From: Champion, Mike <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Feb 2003 11:55:14 -0500
Message-ID: <9A4FC925410C024792B85198DF1E97E40517386A@usmsg03.sagus.com>
To: "'www-ws-arch@w3.org '" <www-ws-arch@w3.org>

> 
Hmmm .... I said:

> To the extent that Web intermediaries can make 
> cacheing, routing, and filtering decisions based on IP address, TCP 
> port number, or HTTP URIs, headers, and methods, they will be easier 
> to implement and more robust across platforms or time, and can work 
> even if the format of the message body is unknown or encrypted.

Dave said:

>  "The RESTful SOA has the advantage better visibility, as the 
> firewall can
>   simply examine the generic interface to determine the action being
>   performed."

OK, Dave's is a bit less pedantic :-)  but don't they say more or less the
same thing?

I would prefer to be specific that what you call the "generic interface"
refers to information visible at the HTTP and TCP/IP levels. And I don't
want to touch the "underlying application protocol" issue ... I just don't
think we'll ever get consensus on that.

But overall, it sounds like we're within striking distance of wording that
would be at least minimally acceptable to both the SOA and REST sides.
That's good!
Received on Tuesday, 25 February 2003 11:55:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:15 GMT