- From: <touch@isi.edu>
- Date: Tue, 18 Feb 97 10:43:59 PST
- To: hallam@ai.mit.edu, touch@isi.edu
- Cc: bertold@tohotom.vein.hu, http-wg%cuckoo.hpl.hp.com@hplb.hpl.hp.com, luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it, www-talk@www10.www3.org
> From: Hallam-Baker <hallam@ai.mit.edu> > > While I agree with some of Joe's points the multi-protocol nature of http > is more than mere assertion. HTTP was running over DECnet back in 1992. If > a protocol provides a stream oriented connection or a very large packet size > it would be feasible to route http over it. The key is that the communication > has to be reliable. Let me be perhaps more clear. The HTTP protocol *can* clearly run over any connection-oriented reliable transport. I am not so sure about connectionless, but that aside. http:// is clearly well-defined, and should not be overloaded. If HTTP over other protocols is desired, the URL should be extended to allow the specification, or the protocol name changed (http: to something else). However, note that such changes require other possible extensions to the URL, to allow arbirary names (with ":"'s inside the host field), etc.). Joe ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Joe Touch - touch@isi.edu http://www.isi.edu/~touch/ ISI / Project Leader, ATOMIC-2, LSAM http://www.isi.edu/atomic2/ USC / Research Assistant Prof. http://www.isi.edu/lsam/
Received on Tuesday, 18 February 1997 11:03:03 UTC