I have received a comment asking me to add XML encoded responses from the server
as an option. This looks to me to be a very interesting and useful addition to
the I-D (the future RFC). However it would be a significant addition, and is
not something in which I have the necessary experience.
We have the choice of placing such an addition in the current draft, or
publishing it in a new (much shorter) draft RFC.
Given the IETF habit of "rough consensus and working code", I would prefer to
wait until the NUT project has working code for this, but I am more than ready
to listen to your ideas.
We would also need volunteer(s) to write the new text. This would require a
rigorous, standards quality, specification of the the XML grammar used and its
meaning. The comment proposed REST. Is this the best choice? Would SOAP be
better in an RFC?
Roger
PS: a piece of IETF jargon: a future RFC is known in the IETF as an I-D. I
shall begin using this terminology.
_______________________________________________
Nut-upsdev mailing list
[email protected]
https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsdev
