[BEEPwg] Soap Over Beep Question
Sat, 29 Jun 2002 14:08:54 -0700 (PDT)
Thanks for the clarification.
I think we were reading that one sentence too literally.
These back and forth discussions serve a useful purpose because even
though the RFC is finalized, these archives will hopefully prevent repeat
questions. I just hope the archives stay up relatively permanently.
On Sat, 29 Jun 2002, Eamon O'Tuathail wrote:
> If you have no other way of identifying that it is a one-way message,
> then you can examine the message, and when you have decided that it
> one-way, then respond with the NUL, and after that you can "process" the
> message. By "process" I mean the substantive work that you will do as a
> result of receiving the message (e.g. write to a database, interact with
> the file system, start a new process, etc.).
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Gabe Wachob [mailto:email@example.com]
> Sent: 28 June 2002 22:30
> To: Eamon O'Tuathail
> Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com;
> Subject: Re: [BEEPwg] Soap Over Beep Question
> IN the case of mixture of patterns (which I think will be the modal
> the wording *could* be interpreted to allow what you describe below
> ("peeks inside the envelope").
> The way I read "immediately sends back a "NUL" message, before
> the contents of the envelope" says that you *can't* do what you propose.
> The trick is what you mean by the "contents of the envelope". I read
> as "you can't open up the SOAP envelope at all". I think you are
> suggesting something else?
> BEEPwg mailing list
Gabe Wachob firstname.lastname@example.org
Founder, WiredObjects http://www.wiredobjects.com