- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 14:35:46 -0500
- To: Sandeep Kumar <sandkuma@cisco.com>
- Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 10:50:09AM -0800, Sandeep Kumar wrote: > Mark, > Could you elaborate as to why you would be against HTTPR? Hi Sandeep. There's really two main reasons, and either one by itself would be enough to convince me to dislike HTTPR. 8-) First, it treats HTTP as a transport protocol rather than an as an application protocol. Yes, I know I sound like a broken record with that, but what can I say? 8-/ In the context of this discussion, let me rephrase my position as this: HTTP defines a coordination language, and treating it as a transport protocol removes all the yummy goodness of the coordination semantics that exist over an HTTP connection. A proper reliable extension of HTTP would *extend* those coordination semantics (and reuse others, like GET) with reliability features. The second reason is just the same reason that people have been chiming in with their experiences about; dealing with reliabile message delivery at the transport layer (the *real* transport layer 8-) is very often a mistake, as it hides important information from applications that they really need to know in order to cope with inevitable network failures over the Internet. The Jim Waldo "Note on Distributed Computing" paper describes this issue really well, IMO; http://www.sun.com/research/techrep/1994/abstract-29.html MB -- Mark Baker. Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. http://www.markbaker.ca Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis
Received on Thursday, 5 December 2002 14:31:36 UTC