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


From: marwan sabbouh <ms@mitre.org>
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2001 17:01:18 -0500
Message-ID: <3AA6AFAD.3B3587B8@mitre.org>
To: Ray Whitmer <rayw@netscape.com>
CC: xml-dist-app@w3.org

Hi Ray;
thanks for your quick reply.  I think we are in agreement on the issues

Ray Whitmer wrote:
> Sorry I didn't reply sooner.
> >In the case of RPC, I have to say that the application
> >sits on top of the RPC module. The app. calls methods
> >implemented by the RPC module.  The rpc module calls
> >method implemented by the XP layer. Below is an
> >examination of an XMLP RPC implementation:
> Agreed.
> >The XP client or app. does the following to call a
> >remote mehod:
> >1-Create an XP transport Binding
> >2-Serialize the message according to the set of RPC
> >convention for XP and RPC
> Or call a language binding or implementation of the
> RPC module which does this.
> >3-Attach the message to the transport Binding
> >4- send the message
> >5-wait for the reply
> >
> >The XP app. sits on top of the XP listener and uses
> >the RPC module. The apps interacts with the RPC module
> >who uses XP objects.
> I agree.  The RPC module includes call with method and
> parameters as well as encoding, either of which may be
> optionally used, I think.
> >1-The XP binding listener receive the requestand hands
> >off the request to the rpc module
> >2- The RPC module deserialize the message using the
> >set of conventions defined by XP
> >3- the RPC module unmarshal method names and params
> >accoeding to xp conventions
> While there is an xp convention for the marshalled
> method names and parameters, I was unaware that there
> was an xp convention for marshalling / unmarshalling
> in a standard way.  So this will be a private mapping.
> >4-call the method implemented by the application
> >5-serialize the reply using the set of conventions
> >defined by XP
> Same comment.  This probably uses RPC module as well.
> >6-return to the XP listener
> >7- Listener sends reply to the client
> >
> >comments please?
> >marwan
> I agree.  More details may be needed.
> Ray Whitmer
> rayw@netscape.com
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Wednesday, 7 March 2001 17:07:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:12 UTC