>> So, you're suggesting that we all use XML to do rpc-ish things?
>>
>> Well... you can turn left here, I'm turning right.
>
>I agree, see below.
I don't, see below.
>> >A similar approach would IMHO be very useful also for the EJB/CORBA
world.
>>
>> imho, a *better* approach is to figure out how to solve the
firewall
>> "problem". The lemming strategy is not always a good one.
Let's
>> be innovative.
>
>Yes, this all-too-common strategy is merely a way to avoid the symptom
>of the problem, and not dealing with the source of the problem. For some
>reason it is easier for us programmers to tunnel our protocols in HTTP,
>instead of trying to fix the firewall "problem" (yup, been there myself,
>and no, I didn't get the message across *sigh*). It is very
>counter-productive, and most certainly has a very bad effect on
>performance.
The firewall problem is very much like the browser-compatibility problem.
It is simply not realistic to expect all Internet users's browsers to
support the latest
DHTML tricks or our favourite JVM.
It is also not realistic to expect all firewalls that must be traversed to
support the
latest CORBA 3.0 Firewall Specification, i.e. ports 683 + 684 for IIOP
without/with SSL.
So the solution is already in the specification stage. It is a matter of how
much
market share you are willing to sacrifice untill utopia finally arrives ;-)
Regards
Javier Borrajo
www.tid.es
>XML over HTTP for RPC? Yeah.. right..
You bet ;-)
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
