Re: How to add new "protocols" ?

> For the "connection oriented" part, RFC2068 already makes it clear that
> a connection-oriented protocol is not necessary. For "reliable
> transport", that is probably a strict requirement for the headers only.
> Future extension of HTTP might well have to deal with data (e.g. audio,
> video streams) where reliability is not such an issue, and QoS might be
> negotiated (e.g. "I need that gaps in the received video are not longer
> than 5 frames"). Then, the body would not even need a reliable
> transport.

I think you-all are stretching things here. My reading of the current
state of things is that HTTP was designed to work on top of
a protocol reasonably similar to TCP, should the need arise.

A moderate degree of transport-independence is good design.``

I don't think it was intended to run on top of all transports,
and I don't think it should try to be the universal protocol
for all proposes. It seems quite reasonable to define a new URL
scheme for audio or video streams rather than overload http:

    Albert Lunde            

Received on Tuesday, 18 February 1997 14:10:42 UTC