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

Re: Protocol Bindings

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2001 13:56:27 -0700
To: laird <laird@airbridge.net>
Cc: eamon.otuathail@clipcode.com, Henrik Frystyk Nielsen <henrikn@microsoft.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org, "Marshall T. Rose" <mrose+mtr.netnews@dbc.mtview.ca.us>
Message-ID: <20010710135624.G1268@mnot.net>

I agree very much with everything said here, except to wonder about
the meaning of 'properly tied together'.


On Tue, Jul 10, 2001 at 04:49:19PM -0400, laird wrote:
> I would like to second this-in ICE (XML messaging over HTTP, etc) people 
> use SSL, PKI, etc., (nearly) transparently to ICE if they want to secure 
> link-level communications, validate servers via x.509, etc. There's no 
> need to duplicate these standards in higher levels so long as the layers 
> are properly tied together.
> 
> And for lightweight app's you can run ICE over raw sockets...
> 
> Since ICE implementors  has done this for a few years successfully I 
> assume SOAP can/will do the same.
> 
> Eamon O'Tuathail wrote:
> 
> > From: "Eamon O'Tuathail" <eamon.otuathail@clipcode.com>
> > To: "Mark Nottingham" <mnot@mnot.net>
> > Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 00:11:03 +0100
> > Subject: RE: Protocol Bindings
> > 
> > Mark
> > 
> >> How can you be certain that every underlying application protocol's
> >> authentication scheme addresses all of the use cases for SOAP?
> > 
> > The obvious solution is for developers to carefully select an application
> > protocol that does exhibit the richness of services they require - not to
> > un-necessarily duplicate said services.
> > 
> > Eamon
> > 
> - Laird Popkin, laird@io.com

-- 
Mark Nottingham
http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 10 July 2001 16:56:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:02 GMT