RE: CC/PP profile repository overworked?

Hi,

But surely a Profile Difference must have a Profile to be different
from? And also, as an average Profile size for a mobile is expected to
be 10K, wouldn't it be too large for a HTTP header?

I suppose the profile-diff could contain URIs for the origin server to
resolve, but this seems to be overkill.

It seems to be a lot of work for a gateway manufacturer to implement
this way, so I presume that this approach wouldn't be used.

Nick Denny
nick.denny@mci.co.uk


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark_Butler@hplb.hpl.hp.com [mailto:Mark_Butler@hplb.hpl.hp.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 3:08 PM
> To: eizdepski@cysive.com; nick.denny@mci.co.uk
> Cc: www-mobile@w3.org
> Subject: RE: CC/PP profile repository overworked?
> 
> 
> Erich's absolutely right - reading the UAProf specs, section 
> 9.1.1.1 page 38
> 
> "The x-wap-profile header is a general header field which 
> must contain the
> following:
> - a URI referencing the CPI or
> - a reference to a profile difference, transported using the
> x-wap-profile-diff or
> - a combination of multiple instances of these two types of data."
> 
> This means headers of the following form are legal:
> 
> GET /ccpp/html/ HTTP/1.1
> Host: localhost
> x-wap-profile:"1-Rb0sq/nuUFQU75vAjKyiHw=="
> x-wap-profile-diff:1;<?xml version="1.0"?>
>  <rdf:RDF xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
>   xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" 
>   
> xmlns:prf="http://www.wapforum.org/profiles/UAPROF/ccppschema-
> 20010430#">
>   <rdf:Description rdf:ID="MyDeviceProfile">
>      <prf:component>
>        <rdf:Description rdf:ID="HardwarePlatform">
>           <rdf:type 
>   rdf:resource="http://www.wapforum.org/profiles/UAPROF/ccppschema-
>     20010426#HardwarePlatform"/>
>           <prf:BitsPerPixel>16</prf:BitsPerPixel>
> </rdf:Description>
>      </prf:component>
>   </rdf:Description>
>  </rdf:RDF>
> 
> I hadn't realised this - I expect DELI will not parse such 
> requests as it
> expects a profile reference. I'll note it as an issue to be 
> fixed in the
> next release. 
> 
> However I think this is an inefficient way of working as it means the
> gateway must forward the entire reference profile to the 
> origin server with
> every request. It's more efficient for the origin server to cache the
> reference profile, but this can only be done with a profile reference.
> Therefore I would discourage the OpenWave folks (or anyone 
> else) from using
> this approach. Anybody else thought about this?
> 
> For more information on DELI see 
> http://www-uk.hpl.hp.com/people/marbut/
> 
> Mark H. Butler
> Research Scientist
> HP Labs Bristol
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erich Izdepski [mailto:eizdepski@cysive.com]
> Sent: 20 November 2001 14:20
> To: nick.denny@mci.co.uk
> Cc: www-mobile@w3.org
> Subject: RE: CC/PP profile repository overworked?
> 
> 
> The WAP gateway can (and I think openwave's will be soon) 
> provide the CC/PP
> profile to the origin server as a HTTP header. The gateway should be
> managing its own cache of profiles that it has collected from 
> other servers,
> in the ideal case. For now, there are no other servers 
> providing CC/PP data
> about device hardware or software, meaning the gateway has to 
> have its own
> database of information. This is OK, it is simple for a 
> gateway to create
> CC/PP data from a local database of phone/handheld 
> information and appended
> it to the device headers. I know the Openwave gateway already 
> appends header
> information about its fax capabilities, so adding a CC/PP 
> profile is not a
> stretch.
> 
> Erich Izdepski
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nick.denny@mci.co.uk [mailto:nick.denny@mci.co.uk]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2001 5:07 AM
> To: www-mobile@w3.org
> Subject: RE: CC/PP profile repository overworked?
> 
> 
> 
> Hello again,
> 
> Firstly thank you to Erich and Mark for your quick and 
> helpful replies.
> 
> Whilst reading the CC/PP requirements and architecture document
> (specifically section 2.2) I noticed that in the WAP 
> implementation, the
> WAP gateway appears to resolve the profile URL and retreive 
> the profile.
> Is this correct? And if so, what is the Origin Server sent? Is it the
> URL to the profile repository, in which case why does the WAP gateway
> have to resolve it? Or is it a URL to the cached information in the
> gateway?
> 
> Many thanks,
> 
> Nick Denny
> nick.denny@mci.co.uk
>