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

Re: Alternative to reverse MEP: reverse HTTP binding

From: Mark Nottingham <mark.nottingham@bea.com>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 10:34:04 -0700
Message-ID: <009401c31b09$1de68c90$5b1f11ac@mnotlaptop>
To: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>, "John Kemp" <john.kemp@earthlink.net>
Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>

Right - it seems more appropriate to do this at the binding level then at
the MEP level, as from the 50,000 foot view the MEPs are the same.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jean-Jacques Moreau" <jean-jacques.moreau@crf.canon.fr>
To: "John Kemp" <john.kemp@earthlink.net>
Cc: <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Sent: Thursday, May 15, 2003 8:34 AM
Subject: Alternative to reverse MEP: reverse HTTP binding

> Another possibility, instead of creating a new MEP, would to use the
> existing Request-Response MEP with a yet-to-be-defined "Reverse SOAP
> HTTP Binding". The Reverse-Binding would associate an HTTP request with
> a SOAP Response and an HTTP response with a SOAP Request.
> Jean-Jacques.
> PS. I tried to send this earlier, but apparently it did not make it to
> the list.
> John Kemp wrote:
> > I was serious too. The binding supports two MEPs - request/response
> > the initiator making an HTTP request to a (HTTP) server which returns
> > SOAP Request in an HTTP Response. The initiator then sends a SOAP
> > response in the body of an HTTP request, and the server responds with
> > the appropriate content. A response-only MEP is also supported, in
> > the initiator sends an HTTP request, to which the HTTP server counters
> > with a SOAP response.
> >
> > You can read the whole document at
http://www.projectliberty.org/specs -
> > - "Liberty Reverse HTTP Binding", Aarts, R, ed. Liberty Alliance
> > (DRAFT), April 2003.
Received on Thursday, 15 May 2003 13:40:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:23 UTC