Re: Last Call: Using SOAP in BEEP to Proposed Standard

[Marshall T. Rose]

> In particular, SOAP is evolving, and there are generic SOAP extensions
> being defined to deal with end to end security, end to end confirmations
> and the like, where end-to-end is defined as "from the SOAP initiator to
> the final SOAP actor". It may be argued that these functions duplicate
> BEEP; in any case, the availability of such extensions within the XML
> protocol itself implies that mapping over TCP is, in fact, trivial; we
> need only a delimitation function, i.e. about the level of complexity of
> RFC-1006. Defining SOAP-over-FOO before SOAP itself is finalized can
> only be an experiment.

christian - as eamon has pointed out, there is a lot of soap 1.1 out there,
and as others have pointed out there is an extensibility mechanism built
into the specification. finally, as any realist will point out, the success
of any group evolving soap is largely dependent on their ability to be
compatible. so, i just don't get your logic.

however, i have a real simple way to put you at ease: let's change the title
of the specification to "Using SOAP 1.1 in BEEP". surely, this would address
your problem...

/mtr