Re: [ogpx] HTTP(S) and XMPP as transports of OGP application layer messages

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> Tue, 18 August 2009 16:52 UTC

Return-Path: <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
X-Original-To: ogpx@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ogpx@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B665E28C2F0 for <ogpx@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Aug 2009 09:52:53 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.484
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.484 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.115, 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 6HX2bY+9S0zB for <ogpx@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 18 Aug 2009 09:52:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rufus.isode.com (rufus.isode.com [62.3.217.251]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5C2CD28C28E for <ogpx@ietf.org>; Tue, 18 Aug 2009 09:52:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.16.2.109] (shiny.isode.com [62.3.217.250]) by rufus.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPA id <SorcZgB9YY2A@rufus.isode.com>; Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:52:54 +0100
Message-ID: <4A8ADC4D.3080900@isode.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:52:29 +0100
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
To: tk@research.att.com
References: <3a880e2c0908121753s34bacba7k59fae708752d3d6a@mail.gmail.com> <e0b04bba0908130954p16da6777n279a462b9cf8a381@mail.gmail.com> <b8ef0a220908170944x200b0f6eh67bde4e7dd481a7e@mail.gmail.com> <19082.38320.554039.749475@crucible.client.research.att.com>
In-Reply-To: <19082.38320.554039.749475@crucible.client.research.att.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Meadhbh Siobhan <meadhbh.siobhan@gmail.com>, ogpx@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [ogpx] HTTP(S) and XMPP as transports of OGP application layer messages
X-BeenThere: ogpx@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Virtual Worlds and the Open Grid Protocol <ogpx.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx>, <mailto:ogpx-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ogpx>
List-Post: <mailto:ogpx@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ogpx-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogpx>, <mailto:ogpx-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2009 16:52:53 -0000

thomas kirk wrote:

>in favor of leaving open the possibility of alternative transports, so
>even if HTTP(S) is the preferred mapping, it would be worthwhile to 
>define a core OGP protocol that's independent of a concrete transport, 
>and specify the HTTP(S) mapping separately, in the manner that 
>BEEP (for example) makes this distinction (rfc3080, 3081).
>
As well as EPP and several others.

>The core protocol can express requirements and assumptions about 
>the transport abstractly; separating its specification leaves 
>open the possibility of future mappings, and makes explicit 
>(and probably simplifies) the ways that OGP depends on underlying 
>service. Given the historical bias, seems reasonable to propose 
>at least an HTTP mapping, but without precluding others.
>
I agree that this is a good idea.