RE: Thoughts about path and intermediaries

Mark,

Good point... I haven't seen anyone define path yet... so I'll try one.

"A XMLP Path represents the sequences of intermediary nodes an XMLP Message
is required to pass through on its journey between sending and receiving
XMLP Processors/Applications."

Questions:
	1 Can an XMLP Path split and merge?
	2 Can there be loops in the path (message passes through the same
intermediary twice)?

Did you have a definition in mind?

Regards

Stuart

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Nottingham [mailto:mnot@akamai.com]
> Sent: 09 February 2001 16:10
> To: Martin Gudgin
> Cc: xml-dist-app@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Thoughts about path and intermediaries
> 
> 
> 
> Sorry, I think I missed the definition of 'path' (which seems pretty
> key here). Is there a reference?
> 
> 
> On Fri, Feb 09, 2001 at 12:47:51PM -0000, Martin Gudgin wrote:
> > Having spent some time thinking about this Stuart and I 
> have come to the
> > following conclusion;
> > 
> > If the XML Protocol Layer directly supports the notion of a 
> path then we can
> > support processing intermediaries that sit between the 
> sender and the
> > ultimate recipient. We can also support the targeting of 
> XML Protocol
> > Modules at particular XML Protocol Handlers located at 
> those processing
> > intermediaries.
> > 
> > Conversely if the XML Protocol Layer does NOT support the 
> notion of a path
> > then it becomes inherently single-hop. In this latter case 
> path becomes an
> > application level construct and not part of the core 
> definition of the XML
> > Protocol. This would simplify the core definition of XML 
> Protocol while
> > still allowing applications to layer intermediary 
> processing on top of XML
> > Protocol.
> > 
> > Thoughts, comments, flames etc. to the usual address
> > 
> > Gudge and Stuart
> > 
> > 
> 
> -- 
> Mark Nottingham, Research Scientist
> Akamai Technologies (San Mateo, CA)
>

Received on Friday, 9 February 2001 12:15:04 UTC