Re: Last Call: Using SOAP in BEEP to Proposed Standard

To: Christian Huitema <huitema at windows.microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: Last Call: Using SOAP in BEEP to Proposed Standard
From: Brian E Carpenter <brian at hursley.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2001 10:45:48 -0500
Cc: "Marshall T. Rose" <mrose+mtr.netnews at DBC.MTVIEW.CA.US>, ietf at ietf.org
Organization: IBM
References: <F66A04C29AD9034A8205949AD0C90104A3E782@win-msg-02.wingroup.windeploy.ntdev.microsoft.com>

Christian Huitema wrote:
> 
> > christian - i'd like to understand any technical concerns you might
> > have on the "soap over beep" specification.
> 
> Well, I am mostly concerned to see "SOAP over BEEP" defined before we
> define the alternative "SOAP over TCP". I mean, if we are transporting
> opaque blobs of data between two points, TCP looks like a no-brainer...

There are other "SOAP over foo" proposals in the wings too. I do agree that
the general question needs looking at. Maybe it's OK to have lots of
SOAP mappings, or maybe it isn't. Although mtr may disagree, imho this does
need to be considered before deciding to publish a Proposed Standard.

   Brian

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Last Call: Using SOAP in BEEP to Proposed Standard
  - From: Dave Crocker

References:
- RE: Last Call: Using SOAP in BEEP to Proposed Standard
  - From: Christian Huitema

Prev by Date: OAM - Operation, Administration, and Maintenance
Next by Date: RE: Last Call: Using SOAP in BEEP to Proposed Standard
Previous by thread: Re: Last Call: Using SOAP in BEEP to Proposed Standard
Next by thread: Re: Last Call: Using SOAP in BEEP to Proposed Standard
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.

Re: Last Call: Using SOAP in BEEP to Proposed Standard

Note: Messages sent to this list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.