ned.freed@mrochek.com
Thu, 13 Dec 2001 07:23:59 -0800 (PST)
> I second the suggestion to use BEEP instead of HTTP.
First let me repeat what I said as in my capacity as an area director at the
VPIM meeting -- we now have a document (draft-moore-using-http-01.txt) that
describes the use of HTTP in other protocols. At a minimum this needs to be
reviewed to make sure your use of HTTP is appropriate.
It is not my objective as an AD to force you to use BEEP and not HTTP in this
work, merely to point out the potential issues that arise should you choose
to use HTTP.
Second, speaking entirely as an individual member of these WGs, I concur with
both Chris and Randall -- IMO BEEP is a better choice for all the reasons Chris
gave.
> ...
> Your request types might be better as hierarchical codes, either
> textual or numeric (like Delivery Status Notifications (DSNs)). For
> example, "Account-Locked/Login-Error-Max-Exceeded" or xxx.yyy.zzz.
I have mixed feeling about this. I guess I wouldn't mind such a structure for
numeric codes -- we have examples where this appears to have worked reasonably
well. But structured textual codes make me nervous. I'm not convinced this has
worked all that well in the case of MDNs.
> (Wow -- a normative reference to MIXER!)
Which needs to go. As pointed out at the meeting, there's equivalent VPIM
text. Don't reference MIXER.
Ned
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Thu Dec 13 2001 - 17:39:39 IST