- From: Rich Salz <rsalz@zolera.com>
- Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2002 21:23:35 -0500
- To: Kurt Cagle <kurt@kurtcagle.net>
- CC: xml-dist-app@w3.org
I think this all goes to show that it's generally not safe to generalize. :) > 2) Secure. Performance speed is generally not an issue with messaging > systems Perhaps not for AOL-style instant messaging, but most definitely for publish/subscribe type messaging used, e.g., in financial services applications -- speed there is critical. > Messaging > systems defer type conversion to later dedicated queuing in processing as a > decoupled operation. Same can be done using "document style" SOAP messaging. > In general RPC transactions are the obverse of this - you have to maintain a > connection Most popular RPC systems -- ONC RPC, DCE RPC (DCOM) -- are primarily over UDP. > you have to encrypt/decrypt Only if you want it. And if you want/need it, certainly there's a cost. > themselves, work fine, but overall contribute to the degradation of the > networks. Spam sent over SMTP is degrading the network way more than XML messaging. > People express a lot of concern about broadband multimedia connections (to > the extent that network adminstrators routinely block multimedia mime-types > because of the way that it degrades performance) but with web services I > suspect that quicktime files will be the least of our worries. Imminent death of the network predicted; GIFs at 11 :) /r$ PS: connectionless http? Not since 1.0 ... -- Zolera Systems, Securing web services (XML, SOAP, Signatures, Encryption) http://www.zolera.com
Received on Tuesday, 8 January 2002 21:22:10 UTC