IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [hybi] Reliable message delivery (was Re: Technical feedback.)

Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com> Mon, 01 February 2010 23:58 UTC

Return-Path: <gregw@webtide.com>
X-Original-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: hybi@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B1A928C0E2 for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Feb 2010 15:58:44 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.474
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.474 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.125, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BRlakuVhOCKe for <hybi@core3.amsl.com>; Mon, 1 Feb 2010 15:58:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-ew0-f228.google.com (mail-ew0-f228.google.com [209.85.219.228]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 397443A67C0 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Mon, 1 Feb 2010 15:58:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: by ewy28 with SMTP id 28so3264451ewy.28 for <hybi@ietf.org>; Mon, 01 Feb 2010 15:59:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.213.96.221 with SMTP id i29mr5025593ebn.99.1265068750723; Mon, 01 Feb 2010 15:59:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ?10.10.1.11? (60-242-119-126.tpgi.com.au [60.242.119.126]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 13sm4079264ewy.5.2010.02.01.15.59.07 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 01 Feb 2010 15:59:09 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4B676ABE.9060901@webtide.com>
Date: Tue, 02 Feb 2010 10:58:54 +1100
From: Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (X11/20090817)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
References: <4B62C5FE.8090904@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <4B62E516.2010003@webtide.com> <5c902b9e1001290756r3f585204h32cacd6e64fbebaa@mail.gmail.com> <4B636757.3040307@webtide.com> <8449BE19-3061-4512-B563-02973FBB707B@apple.com> <5c902b9e1001292310l5442d476n8375139f3480671b@mail.gmail.com> <26D406E7-2319-476E-9ADF-80D84200C270@apple.com> <5c902b9e1001292333k79569316lf371938c9aa766@mail.gmail.com> <128BFD31-9835-47B1-B7A9-F20F5CDA8D8C@apple.com> <20100130144936.GD19124@shareable.org> <5c902b9e1001301552n6efb7969o34110373e3ab4945@mail.gmail.com> <4B672C9D.9010205@ericsson.com> <op.u7gy9bag64w2qv@annevk-t60> <4B675CA6.2070406@webtide.com> <op.u7g04dun64w2qv@annevk-t60>
In-Reply-To: <op.u7g04dun64w2qv@annevk-t60>
X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Hybi <hybi@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [hybi] Reliable message delivery (was Re: Technical feedback.)
X-BeenThere: hybi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Server-Initiated HTTP <hybi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/hybi>
List-Post: <mailto:hybi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/hybi>, <mailto:hybi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2010 23:58:44 -0000

Anne van Kesteren wrote:
> On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 23:58:46 +0100, Greg Wilkins <gregw@webtide.com> wrote:
>> [...]
> 
> Why does all that need to be part of the base protocol? It seems all
> that can be handled by the sub protocols, if deemed necessary.

Well this is something that needs to be discussed during the
requirements phase.   What are the requirements for a base
protocol.

But I would think that reasonable error handling should be part
of the base protocol.  It's like suggesting that 400 Bad Request
be taken out of HTTP.

Note that I'm not advocating that the base protocol actually
do  any reopening of connection or retrying of messages. Simply
that it be capable  of passing the information on which such
things could be implemented as part of a layered solution.

regards

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email