> Well, with a pluggable architecture and a standard message format we should > be able to support many different modes of transmission. From a client > perspective, http makes sense to me and xml over http, whether SOAP or not, > also makes sense. That's not to say, however, that someone writing a client > couldn't use another method if he/she chooses.
I'm only supportive of multiple transport protocols if they serve a purpose. The purpose of HTTP is that it can get through firewalls which only let HTTP through (and they do exist). XML of HTTP doesn't get you anything which FNP over HTTP got you in terms of node to node. The benefit of SOAP instead of FNP for a client protocol is that you can use a SOAP library, which already exist in most every language and have simple to use APIs. _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://www.uprizer.com/mailman/listinfo/devl
