W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > February 2001

Re: [AMG] Thoughts about path and intermediaries

From: Martin Gudgin <marting@develop.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:30:13 -0000
Message-ID: <007c01c092bd$f928aa80$0200a8c0@greyarea>
To: "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>, "Williams, Stuart" <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "Frystyk" <frystyk@microsoft.com>, "Jean-Jacques Moreau \(E-mail\)" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>, "John Ibbotson \(E-mail\)" <john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com>, "Krishna Sankar \(E-mail\)" <ksankar@cisco.com>, "Lynne Thompson \(E-mail\)" <Lynne.Thompson@unisys.com>, "Marc Hadley \(E-mail\)" <marc.hadley@uk.sun.com>, "Mark Baker \(E-mail\)" <mark.baker@Canada.Sun.COM>, "Nick Smilonich" <nick.smilonich@unisys.com>, "Oisin Hurley \(E-mail\)" <ohurley@iona.com>, "Scott Isaacson \(E-mail\)" <SISAACSON@novell.com>, "Yves Lafon \(E-mail\)" <ylafon@w3.org>
Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
I guess the problem I have is that I don't understand how you can have
targeting ( marking part of a message as requiring processing by a specific
software entity ) without routing ( specifying ( some of ) the nodes the
message must pass through on its way from sender to ultimate recipient ).

If the XML Protocol layer doesn't know about routing then it doesn't know
which nodes a message must pass through. How then can targetting happen at
intermediary nodes if those intermediary nodes are never visited?


----- Original Message -----
From: "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>
To: "'Martin Gudgin'" <marting@develop.com>; "Williams, Stuart"
<skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>; "Frystyk" <frystyk@microsoft.com>; "Jean-Jacques
Moreau (E-mail)" <moreau@crf.canon.fr>; "John Ibbotson (E-mail)"
<john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com>; "Krishna Sankar (E-mail)" <ksankar@cisco.com>;
"Lynne Thompson (E-mail)" <Lynne.Thompson@unisys.com>; "Marc Hadley
(E-mail)" <marc.hadley@uk.sun.com>; "Mark Baker (E-mail)"
<mark.baker@Canada.Sun.COM>; "Nick Smilonich" <nick.smilonich@unisys.com>;
"Oisin Hurley (E-mail)" <ohurley@iona.com>; "Scott Isaacson (E-mail)"
<SISAACSON@novell.com>; "Yves Lafon (E-mail)" <ylafon@w3.org>
Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, February 09, 2001 4:19 PM
Subject: RE: [AMG] Thoughts about path and intermediaries

> >Having spent some time thinking about this Stuart and I have
> >come to the
> >following conclusion;
> Isn't there really three options and not just two:
> 1) One can support targeting only
> 2) One can support targeting and routing
> 3) One can support neither
> Given that we have as part of our charter and several requirements
> addressing intermediaries 3) doesn't sound interesting.
> However, it seems perfectly plausible to define a processing model that
> takes into account targeting without actually defining routing. As an
> example this is in fact what SOAP does. Once you have the targeting, it
> appears that pretty much anything else including routing can be built on
> top. Unless we can find proof that this is not the case then I would favor
> 1).
> Henrik
Received on Friday, 9 February 2001 12:31:23 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:11 UTC