On Thu, 30 Dec 2021, Greg Troxel wrote:
I have received a comment asking me to add XML encoded responses from
the server as an option.
Do you mean
there is already XML and you are going to document it
or
there is not XML, and someone is asking to draft a description of what XML
might be for the document, in the hopes that somebody in some NUT-compliant
implementation will implmenent it?
The proposal is to create and document a simple XML encoding for the responses
from the Attachment Daemon, to facilitate the use of mobile Management Daemons
(clients on iPhone, Android, ...)
As I grep the sources to 2.7.4 (yes I know that's old, but it's the most
recent release, and what is handy in pkgsrc), I see a driver that talks XML to
Eaton units, but I don't see a user-to-nut XML interface.
XML encoding of responses would be completely new.
The comment proposed REST. Is this the best choice? Would SOAP be better in
an RFC?
Posing that question makes it clear to me that the XML situation is not baked
enough to put in an RFC, and I think it's much better to document what's
already established, and then after the XML has settled down, create a
revision that includes XML also, along with any other fixes.
That's a likely path for a future RFC. A second text (which following the IETF
process, would have a new number) which corrects and extends the first and which
is carried along a standards track. But in the meantime is there a volunteer to
write text and demonstration code for the current I-D?
Roger
_______________________________________________
Nut-upsdev mailing list
[email protected]
https://alioth-lists.debian.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nut-upsdev
