Mark Baker wrote: > That, right there, is how the industry got itself into this mess. The > former approach fights an uphill battle against millions of deployed > software components (servers, firewalls, caches), while the latter > works *with* that infrastructure. This fight was over before it > began.
Making an invocation layer treat transport different from transfer is where it can become ugly. If you need to transport a session or conversational protocol between two network entities, that might be more difficult, and often is, when you have to consider the bits as being transfered. In particular, there is extra layering with HTTP in particular, which complicates matters by demanding that there be logical boundries or switching points between forward flowing and backward flowing data. Gregg Wonderly ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Something is new at Yahoo! Groups. Check out the enhanced email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/SISQkA/gOaOAA/yQLSAA/NhFolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
