...
Good point. We may want to define protocols that can use staged
delivery, even if there is no network involved. If that's the
intent, the bullet could be a bit clearer, e.g., if we want to
define protocols that work even if we deliver messages via a USB
token from a source to a destination. However, I note that a
protocol of that sort is likely to be more complex than one that
assumes use of lower layer network protocols, even staged delivery
ones.
Fully disagree. We can decouple the format from how one hands the
object to the next party. This is akin to defining CMS separate from
S/MIME.
It's not the format; it's the semantics of the underlying delivery
system. I designed and implemented this stuff a few years ago, and my
experience suggests that there is a significant difference. For
example, if I can assume network connectivity, even staged delivery,
I may be able to make assumptions about responses from a device re
delivery of data, that are less likely to be viable if a person is
moving data on a USB token.
Steve
