Which parts of the system (provider, hub, subscriber) need to know the guid and/or timestamp for each thing?
-- John Panzer / Google [email protected] / abstractioneer.org <http://www.abstractioneer.org/> / @jpanzer On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 5:04 PM, Jeff Lindsay <[email protected]> wrote: > To summarize the problem from my understanding: Atom comes with unique > IDs/dates for each entry. Arbitrary payloads would have to put it in > the headers. Then signing (as proposed in the header) would have to > somehow include that to be useful against replays. > > I thought about it and I feel like we might be able to come up with > something, but, you know, if you're doing arbitrary payloads you might > already have this in your body! I think the burden of putting a unique > ID in your payload is much easier than telling your users they have to > use HTTPS (even though I agree everybody should be using it). > > -jeff > > On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 2:42 PM, Brett Slatkin <[email protected]> wrote: > > Good discussion. Separating distribution from semantics is a > > worthwhile goal. Probably the easiest goal to achieve, too. > > > > I banged my head against this problem a few months ago. Where I left > > off was that we need a solution to the HTTP "turducken" problem. Can > > you guys go over this thread for me? > > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/pubsubhubbub/browse_thread/thread/6bb4b26043059f27?pli=1 > > > > Am I wrong to think we even need to solve this? > > > > -Brett > > > > > > On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 1:15 PM, Alexis Richardson <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> +1 > >> > >> On Fri, Feb 25, 2011 at 8:10 PM, Charl van Niekerk <[email protected]> > wrote: > >>> On Fri, 2011-02-25 at 12:02 -0800, Jeff Lindsay wrote: > >>>> Yes, this is where I'm at, too. It seems like we're getting there > >>>> though. It just seems like (and I could be wrong!) there is a lot of > >>>> bias towards Atom/feed semantics. Even the tiniest structure is a > >>>> constraint to use cases and adoption. That's all I'm saying. Also just > >>>> the marketing. Is it about feeds or is it a distribution framework? > >>>> Because it sounds like the former and that's what people think that I > >>>> talk to and they decide it's not worth messing with. > >>> > >>> Same here, Atom feeds were obviously the most logical place to start > and > >>> would have the greatest short-term impact on the web as it stands but > to > >>> have to reinvent the wheel for other formats is kinda ridiculous. Would > >>> be awesome to see PubSubHubbub become a more generic distribution > >>> framework and be marketed as such! > >>> > >>> > >> > > > > > > -- > Jeff Lindsay > http://progrium.com >
