W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > July 2003

Re: Requirements for attachments transport optimisation

From: <jones@research.att.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Jul 2003 10:00:55 -0400 (EDT)
Message-Id: <200307031400.h63E0tl22873@bual.research.att.com>
To: mark.nottingham@bea.com, xml-dist-app@w3.org

There are a number of requirements of this sort in our current requirements
list, which we need to revisit for MTOM at some point (ncluding some which
overlap with your list, Mark).

Mark Jones
AT&T

	From: "Mark Nottingham" <mark.nottingham@bea.com>
	To: "Xml-Dist-App@W3. Org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
	Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 14:07:25 -0700
	Subject: Requirements for attachments^H^H^H transport optimisation

	I think it would be useful to spend a little time identifying the
	higher-level requirements surrounding MTOM and the like.

	These are the ones I'm aware of:

	1) Reduce "bytes on the wire", to improve bandwidth usage / transport
	latency.
	2) Reduce processing overhead during the generation and consumption of
	messages.
	3) Enable selective reordering in the serialization of message components,
	to allow flexibility in processing.

	The third deserves a bit more explanation; a use case might be placing a
	large binary file after the SOAP envelope in the serialized message, so
	that an intermediary (or ultimate receiver, for that matter) can act upon
	the message before reading all of the bytes off the wire.

	Are there any other high-level requirements associated with the abstract
	MTOM feature? I think it would be nice to call these out in the document
	at some point.

	It would also be good to note that these can all be seen as encoding
	issues and nothing more.

	Cheers,

	--
	Mark Nottingham
Received on Thursday, 3 July 2003 10:00:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:14 GMT