- From: Sami Khoury <sami@whatuwant.net>
- Date: Thu, 20 Apr 2000 13:49:45 -0700
- To: "'Eric Prud'hommeaux'" <eric@w3.org>
- Cc: "'bhunt@adobe.com'" <bhunt@adobe.com>, "'xml-dist-app@w3.org'" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Thanks, Eric. I've cc'd the list on this go-round as we're all fine with taking this exchange public. To summarize what is quoted below, the information on ICE listed in Eric's protocol comparison's table was a bit dated, so Bruce mailed with updates, which are below. Notably, ICE is in fact deployed and the spec has actively matured to a 1.1 version due out shortly. An open-source reference implementation written in java is also on the way (again, real soon now). Eric, one question you raise below, about a protocol for serializing arbitrary data structures and then performing an arbitrary function on them, I am not clear on. Could you restate this? Sami -----Original Message----- From: Eric Prud'hommeaux [mailto:eric@w3.org] Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2000 11:12 PM To: Sami Khoury Cc: 'bhunt@adobe.com' Subject: Re: XML and encoding (was Re: summary table of WWW9 agenda propos als) I'd like to discuss this on xml-dist-app. Feel free to quote anything I said on the list. I didn't send this reply to the list as I don't want to publicize a conversation without mutual consent. On Tue, Apr 18, 2000 at 11:21:20AM -0700, Sami Khoury wrote: > hi Eric- > > I noticed that the protocol matrix has not been changed to indicate the > deployed status of ICE. I have attached the message the my colleague on the > ICE Authoring Group, Bruce Hunt, sent to you to clear up many of the > particulars of ICE in your table. > > Questions/comments appreciated. Content-Description: [ice-ag] ICE - Protocol Update. > Message-ID: <38ECBBCE.66F99557@adobe.com> > From: "V. Bruce Hunt" <bhunt@adobe.com> > Reply-To: ice-ag@egroups.com > To: eric@w3.org, ice-ag@egroups.com > Subject: [ice-ag] ICE - Protocol Update. > Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 09:31:10 -0700 > MIME-Version: 1.0 > X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) > List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ice-ag-unsubscribe@egroups.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > > I would like to give you an update on ICE for your table. > > ICE has been implemented by at least 4 vendors and it is deployed in > multiple sites. An open source reference version of ICE is > under development by the ICE-AG with sponsorship from Adobe. updated If you give me a URL, I'll link it from the "deployed" work in the ICE row. > Under your facets, ICE has the following facets: > > serialization - core capability. > > extensibility - ICE 1.0 has DTD extensibility defined. ICE 1.1 defines > extension negotiation. > > skinnyness - ICE 1.0 and later permits a trivial implementation of a > subscriber, syndicator and parameter negotiation. > > protocol - core capability > > interface discovery - core capability. ICE uses parameter negotiation > to > enhance this process. > > transactions (ACIDity). ICE carefully defines requests and responses so > that > recovery and a known state is always possible on both > sides; > regardless of error condition or response. Further, ICE > provides collection management that recovers the state of > a collection for any subscriber and brings the collection > up to the current state. > > remote procedure. ICE 1.1 provides agent defined parameters on a per > subscription > basis or on a per relationship basis; including the > ability for > one party to direct the invocation of an identified > procedure > by the other. > > business process. ICE 1.1 supports almost any variant on content > delivery work flow; > It provides negotiated delivery policies. ICE supports > content > delivery on both a replacement basis or a cumulative basis > or > any variation in between. ICE supports content use > requirements > and permits those and any other parameters to be > negotiated. > ICE supports direct delivery; encrypted delivery; and > referenced, > access and time policy controlled delivery. This means > that ICE > can manage the delivery of real-time high-bandwidth media > and > control access to it. > > security. ICE 1.1 permits packaged content to be in any form, including > encryption. > ICE provides multiple types of access control for referenced > media and > it is designed to be run under SSL. > > routing. ICE 1.0 and later provide support for payload redirect on > both a > permanent and temporary basis. One problem with discussing ICE in this context is that, as far as I understood from a couple hours on the spec, it's not a protocol for serializing arbitrary data structures and performing an arbitrary function on them. > ICE is designed to be operated over any of a number of reliable > transport protocols. It works > well with HTTP and POP3. I'd like to play with features like this in LOTP. Any lessons learned would be greatly appreciated. > One of the interesting new features of ICE 1.1 is arbitrary parameter > negotiation. This > facility permits a Syndicator and Subscriber to manage a set of > operational parameters and > automatically negotiate optimal values between the parties. This allows > ICE implementations > to automatically alter the delivery of content around busy times for a > server. The > negotiation mechansism applies to any agreed upon set of parameters > between a syndicator > and subscriber. The negotiation mechanism has been extended to > negotiate ICE extensions > both at the subscription level and at the protocol level. Again, any lessons we can learn from you... -- -eric (eric@w3.org)
Received on Thursday, 20 April 2000 16:50:47 UTC