[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [KEYPROV] Re: [APPS-REVIEW] Review of HTTP Binding for DSKPP


Without speaking to BCP56, a few things here caught my eye...

On 2007/10/05, at 5:11 AM, Hallam-Baker, Phillip wrote:

Web Services is a standards based architecture with broad industry- wide support. Keith's RFC was written in 2002 before the Web Services architecture was developed. There is clearly a conflict between the views being advance here and established practice for the design and implementation of Web Services based specifications.

It would be interesting to see these claims supported -- e.g., references for these standards, their architecture and evidence of broad support for those standards and that architecture.

It is not helpful here if the IETF is going to insist on a separate definition of Web Services specifications that is not in sync with where the Web Services world is.

I'm sure both the W3C and OASIS would love it if the locus of the "Web Services world" could be nailed down, never mind the IETF.

Either the BCP56 view is right in which case we need the proponents of this view to be talking to the wider Web Services world (OASIS, W3C) and arriving at a consensus position or the BCP56 view is obsolete and needs to be updated.

The W3C, for one, has a very clear position about the relationship between the Web and Web Services, which includes use of HTTP; see documents by the TAG, for example.

The port number issue is somewhat more complex. The number of Web Services is rapidly expanding and the idea of one port per Web Service is simply not sustainable. We only have 65536 ports and we are going to have far more Web Services in use.

If you expand "Web Services" to include what some people are now calling "HTTP Web Services" or "RESTful Web Services," I agree that BCP56 needs some clarification.

Cheers,

--
Mark Nottingham       mnot at yahoo-inc.com




_______________________________________________
APPS-REVIEW mailing list
APPS-REVIEW at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-review