RE: [XCON] New draft on manipulating state in a conference
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [XCON] New draft on manipulating state in a conference



Hi,

I suppose the main distinction that needs to be made is whether the conference control protocol will be based on "data manipulation" vs. "remote procedure call" (I'm not sure if this is the best terminology).

It seems that the consensus in XCON WG has been that "data manipulation" is not the right way, and that has led to the abandoning of the XCAP CPCP application usage. 

As Dean points out, there are already many "remote procedure call" protocols. Although they are probably functionally equal (you can do anything using any of them), there surely are some practical considerations that should help in picking one (and only one!): 
- Reuse: implementation, understanding, security frameworks, NAT traversal
  This make me consider things like TCP & TLS & even HTTP that are in most SIP endpoints anyway and have certain nice practical properties
- Efficiency
  Having seen all kinds of latency problems in SIP over wide-area wireless I also like ideas such as binary encoding :-)

And if we design something from the scratch it surely MUST support multiple operations within a single atomic transaction!

Markus
  

> -----Original Message-----
> From: xcon-bounces at ietf.org [mailto:xcon-bounces at ietf.org]On Behalf Of
> ext Dean Willis
> Sent: 17 February, 2005 01:47
> To: Henning Schulzrinne
> Cc: Cullen Jennings; Adam Roach; XCON-IETF
> Subject: Re: [XCON] New draft on manipulating state in a conference
> 
> 
> 
> On Feb 15, 2005, at 9:33 PM, Henning Schulzrinne wrote:
> 
> > Aren't we re-inventing SNMP here, except less general?
> >
> 
> Okay, who wants to sign up for the conference-control MIB team?
> 
> Once we've got that done, we can do the SOAP, XML-RPC, ONC-RPC, RMI, 
> and .NET bindings. And maybe an INFO method.
> 
> Otherwise said -- any new control protocol is a re-invention of SNMP, 
> just less general. Maybe that should be teaching us 
> something. But I'm 
> not sure what . . .
> 
> --
> Dean
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> XCON mailing list
> XCON at ietf.org
> https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon
> 

_______________________________________________
XCON mailing list
XCON at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/xcon




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