- From: Andrew Layman <andrewl@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2001 16:11:16 -0700
- To: <www-ws@w3.org>
See also DIME for the application of SOAP-RP to conveyance of generic content. http://www.gotdotnet.com/team/xml_wsspecs/dime/default.htm Developmentor has a mailing list for discussion of DIME. http://discuss.develop.com/dime.html -----Original Message----- From: john d. beatty [mailto:jbeatty@gonesilent.com] Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2001 3:40 PM To: www-ws@w3.org Subject: RE: open transport protocol for aysnc web services? I believe SOAP-RP is more analogous to APEX [1] [2] than it is to raw BEEP (APEX is an asynch messaging layer that uses BEEP as a transport). Given that, what does anyone think of APEX vs. SOAP-RP? IMO, there is a serious need for a generic, standard asynch messaging protocol that allows any type of message to be routed. SOAP-RP tightly couples the message routing information to the message (e.g., the message routing information is contained in the header of the SOAP message), thus it is not a generic solution (only SOAP messages are allowed). APEX, on the other hand, allows arbritary messages. However, SOAP-RP is more pragmatic in that it's pretty simple; it doesn't require a more-complex transport like BEEP; there's a smaller community to get the standard pushed through; etc. (btw, I'm not sure of the status of BEEP-over-HTTP. There is currently only a BEEP-TCP binding specified, AFAIK.) Note that there is a SOAP-over-BEEP Internet Draft [3]. This is a simplistic binding spec anologous to specifying a SOAP-over-HTTP binding. It does not attempt to define an asynch messaging layer. It might be a good thing for the SOAP community to clamor for a more generic messaging solution than SOAP-RP and for to put pressure on Microsoft, IBM, Sun, TIBCO, webMethods, et. al. to try a little harder on a standard, generic asynch messaging protocol. Quick question for the .NET-heads out there: is MSMQ 3.0 using SOAP-RP, or is it something different?? I was just looking that the MSMQ 3.0 white paper [4], and it says it defines an HTTP-based transport with MSMQ headers in the SOAP envelope: "From a programming point of view, every message sent via HTTP will automatically be formatted as a SOAP-based message. New properties, specific to SOAP, are available to developers for controlling SOAP formatting at a fine level. For instance, it is possible for a message sender to insert non-MSMQ headers into the SOAP envelope and have them retrieved and processed by the message receiver." john [1] http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-apex-core-04.txt [2] http://beepcore.org/beepcore/specsdocs.jsp [3] http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-etal-beep-soap-03.txt [4] http://www.microsoft.com/msmq > From: Henrik Frystyk Nielsen (henrikn@microsoft.com) > Although there certainly are similarities between SOAP-RP and BEEP, I > actually see them as being quite different in their scope and what > they do. > > SOAP-RP is a stateless, message oriented mechanism for exchanging > messages along message paths using any message pattern. One of the big > differences to me is that I in SOAP-RP can address intermediaries and > have them perform tasks - in other words provide a decentralized > processing mechanism. This is useful in scenarios where you want to > role out web services as value add services. > > On the other hand I would categorize BEEP as a connection-oriented > hop-by-hop protocol with some notion of message exchange patterns like > request/response, for example, although it doesn't actually define an > application.
Received on Thursday, 12 July 2001 19:11:50 UTC