> -----Original Message----- > From: drinks-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:drinks-bounces at ietf.org] On Behalf > Of Alexander Mayrhofer > > General questions regarding deployed transport protocols: > > 1. How many folks have SOAP implementations in their OSS-BSS systems for > the > kinds of protocols DRINKS is looking out? We have both on the embedded systems, but from OSS we only offer/expose SOAP because that's what every single customer (in the SP market) seems to want. (in the Enterprise market there's a mix) That's assuming the "kinds of protocols DRINKS is looking at" are "provisioning" protocols to OSS systems, for LUF type global data. As opposed to, for example, "peering" protocols for LRF type local data with real-time topology-aware SIP routing decision implications. > Questions to reach WG concensus on: > > 3. Do you agree that the design team should define the architecture / > data model independently from the definition of a potential > transport protocol? (as far as possible) YES. > 4. Given the goal to define the data model outside its transport, do you > prefer the group to > A. Define a SOAP based transport protocol and if anyone is > interested they can work on a RESTful version? > B. The WG try and do both? A. One step at a time. -hadriel
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.