On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 07:20:18PM -0800, Dan Li wrote:
> I'd say the motivation for WCIP is two fold, for dynamic content and for
> vertical peering. Dynamic content refers to a list of things (frequently
> changing, personalized, and dynamically generated from databases). The
> current "ObjectList" DTD covers only case 1 (frequently changing ones), but
> the trajectory is to carry more complex event notifications for
> personalization and dynamically generated stuff. By vertical peering, I
> refer to things like preloading, delta update, and log reporting, etc. This
> is mainly leveraging the notification transport (the channel and the relay).
Perhaps "vertical peering" isn't the most fortunate phrase to use here, as
it may confuse the issues ;)
> I think "transport" deserves more discussion. There are really two
> components in WCIP, 1. a notification transport (including the concept of
> channel, relay point, and appl-layer multicast), and 2. the
> semantics/messages carried by this transport (right now is ObjectList, but
> will expand). Along this line, there's plenty of room to clearly separate
> this two and allow growth (separately) in both of them. How Beep (formerly
> BXXP) fits in here? a foundation for building WCIP transport?
IIRC, BXXP is the name, 'beep' is how you pronounce it, as well as the WG
name. From what little I've seen/read so far, it may be a good transport
framework/foundation.
The XML Protocol WG in the W3C is defining a packaging mechanism for XML
over arbitrary transport (which may eventually include BXXP). While I'm not
(yet) suggesting that we look at using their work, examining their approach
to these issues may be educational for us. Disclaimer - I'm a member of that
WG.
-- Mark Nottingham, Research Scientist Akamai Technologies (San Mateo, CA)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Nov 18 2004 - 11:21:29 MST