Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [soapbuilders] alternative transports

Expand Messages
  • Paul Kulchenko
    Hi, Simon! ... Pretty much. I don t use any headers, and to mark the end of transmition I close socket for writing, so another side can detect this and start
    Message 1 of 13 , Oct 21, 2001
      Hi, Simon!

      --- Simon Fell <soap@...> wrote:
      > Thanks Paul, do you have info on how the TCP transport works, do i
      > just open a connection and send the envelope, etc ?
      Pretty much. I don't use any headers, and to mark the end of
      transmition I close socket for writing, so another side can detect
      this and start sending (close socket when you're done). Shouldn't be
      difficult to implement. Everything else is the same as with HTTP. SSL
      support for TCP is also available. Let me know if you see it
      differently.

      Best wishes, Paul.

      > On Sun, 21 Oct 2001 10:53:26 -0700 (PDT), in soap you wrote:
      >
      > >Hi, Simon!
      > >
      > >I can bring up tcp, Jabber, POP3/SMTP enpoints pretty easily, but
      > I
      > >need to babysit them (longrunning processes are forbidden where
      > >soaplite is hosted).
      > >
      > >Best wishes, Paul.
      > >
      > >--- Simon Fell <soap@...> wrote:
      > >> Hi,
      > >>
      > >> Does anybody have any endpoints up available over transports
      > other
      > >> than HTTP ?, I have an SMTP endpoint up, anyone have any
      > >> alternative
      > >> transports running ? [raw TCP, DIME, Jabber etc]
      > >>
      > >> Thanks
      > >> Simon
      > >> www.pocketsoap.com
      > >>
      > >> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      > >>
      > >>
      > -----------------------------------------------------------------
      > >> This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to
      > >> discuss implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay
      > >> on-topic.
      > >>
      > >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > >> soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > >>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      > >> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      > >>
      > >>
      > >
      > >
      > >__________________________________________________
      > >Do You Yahoo!?
      > >Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
      > >http://personals.yahoo.com
      > >
      > >
      > >-----------------------------------------------------------------
      > >This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to
      > discuss implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay
      > on-topic.
      > >
      > >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > >soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      > >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
      >
      > -----------------------------------------------------------------
      > This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to
      > discuss implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay
      > on-topic.
      >
      > To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      >
      >
      > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
      > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >
      >


      __________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
      http://personals.yahoo.com
    • Rich Salz
      anyone intereste in soap over beep? -- Zolera Systems, Securing web services (XML, SOAP, Signatures, Encryption) http://www.zolera.com
      Message 2 of 13 , Oct 21, 2001
        anyone intereste in soap over beep?
        --
        Zolera Systems, Securing web services (XML, SOAP, Signatures,
        Encryption)
        http://www.zolera.com
      • Simon Fell
        ... yes, and i see that there s a C library now available for beep [last time i looked it was java only] Cheers Simon www.pocketsoap.com
        Message 3 of 13 , Oct 21, 2001
          On Sun, 21 Oct 2001 17:08:42 -0400, in soap you wrote:

          >anyone intereste in soap over beep?

          yes, and i see that there's a C library now available for beep [last
          time i looked it was java only]

          Cheers
          Simon
          www.pocketsoap.com
        • Simon Fell
          Hi Paul, So that s the TCP one done [pretty trivial]. Any tips on getting your Jabber server up and running, i have a clean W2k box here running SOAP::Lite.
          Message 4 of 13 , Oct 23, 2001
            Hi Paul,

            So that's the TCP one done [pretty trivial]. Any tips on getting your
            Jabber server up and running, i have a clean W2k box here running
            SOAP::Lite.

            Cheers
            Simon
            www.pocketsoap.com

            On Sun, 21 Oct 2001 12:44:56 -0700 (PDT), in soap you wrote:

            >Hi, Simon!
            >
            >--- Simon Fell <soap@...> wrote:
            >> Thanks Paul, do you have info on how the TCP transport works, do i
            >> just open a connection and send the envelope, etc ?
            >Pretty much. I don't use any headers, and to mark the end of
            >transmition I close socket for writing, so another side can detect
            >this and start sending (close socket when you're done). Shouldn't be
            >difficult to implement. Everything else is the same as with HTTP. SSL
            >support for TCP is also available. Let me know if you see it
            >differently.
            >
            >Best wishes, Paul.
            >
            >> On Sun, 21 Oct 2001 10:53:26 -0700 (PDT), in soap you wrote:
            >>
            >> >Hi, Simon!
            >> >
            >> >I can bring up tcp, Jabber, POP3/SMTP enpoints pretty easily, but
            >> I
            >> >need to babysit them (longrunning processes are forbidden where
            >> >soaplite is hosted).
            >> >
            >> >Best wishes, Paul.
            >> >
            >> >--- Simon Fell <soap@...> wrote:
            >> >> Hi,
            >> >>
            >> >> Does anybody have any endpoints up available over transports
            >> other
            >> >> than HTTP ?, I have an SMTP endpoint up, anyone have any
            >> >> alternative
            >> >> transports running ? [raw TCP, DIME, Jabber etc]
            >> >>
            >> >> Thanks
            >> >> Simon
            >> >> www.pocketsoap.com
            >> >>
            >> >> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
            >> >>
            >> >>
            >> -----------------------------------------------------------------
            >> >> This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to
            >> >> discuss implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay
            >> >> on-topic.
            >> >>
            >> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            >> >> soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >> >>
            >> >>
            >> >>
            >> >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
            >> >> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >> >>
            >> >>
            >> >
            >> >
            >> >__________________________________________________
            >> >Do You Yahoo!?
            >> >Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
            >> >http://personals.yahoo.com
            >> >
            >> >
            >> >-----------------------------------------------------------------
            >> >This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to
            >> discuss implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay
            >> on-topic.
            >> >
            >> >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            >> >soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >> >
            >> >
            >> >
            >> >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
            >> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >> >
            >>
            >>
            >> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
            >>
            >> -----------------------------------------------------------------
            >> This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to
            >> discuss implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay
            >> on-topic.
            >>
            >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            >> soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >>
            >>
            >>
            >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
            >> http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >>
            >>
            >
            >
            >__________________________________________________
            >Do You Yahoo!?
            >Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals.
            >http://personals.yahoo.com
            >
            >
            >-----------------------------------------------------------------
            >This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to discuss implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay on-topic.
            >
            >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
            >soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
            >
            >
            >
            >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
            >
          • dj.adams@gmx.net
            ... your ... Hi There s currently a discussion going on over on the Jabber RPC interest group list [1] that s discussing the formalisation of SOAP messages
            Message 5 of 13 , Oct 29, 2001
              --- In soapbuilders@y..., Simon Fell <soap@z...> wrote:
              > Hi Paul,
              >
              > So that's the TCP one done [pretty trivial]. Any tips on getting
              your
              > Jabber server up and running, i have a clean W2k box here running

              Hi

              There's currently a discussion going on over on the Jabber RPC
              interest group list [1] that's discussing the formalisation of SOAP
              messages over Jabber.

              I've re-written the SOAP::Transport::JABBER module of SOAP::Lite to
              reflect the current way of thinking (from the list); I've also got a
              couple of Perl modules that do exactly the same as the Perl modules
              for Jabber-RPC [2], but for SOAP RPC (i.e. there's a
              Jabber::SOAP::Client and a Jabber::SOAP::Server module). It uses
              SOAP::Lite to perform the actual serialisation/deserialisation (can
              you say "serdes", like "modem" for modulation/demodulation? ;-)

              Bear in mind that the formalisation of SOAP messages over Jabber is
              not complete. The Jabber::SOAP stuff, and my rewrite of the
              SOAP::Transport::JABBER module reflects the RPC flavour of SOAP; the
              use of Jabber to transport one-way (or multi-hop) SOAP messages (as
              opposed to RPC request/response style) isn't there yet, as it's a
              recent addition to the discussion.

              Oh yeah, the SOAP::Transport::JABBER re-write also allows you to
              build SOAP responders that connect to the Jabber server backbone as
              components, rather than connecting as clients.

              If you're interested, I could post the (early) code somewhere. I
              haven't done yet due to, well, no excuse really ;-)

              Kind regards
              DJ

              p.s. I don't have access to a W2K box, so I can't really advise on
              compiling Jabber for it, but I'm pretty sure there have been some
              recent messages on JDEV, the 'main' Jabber mailing list [3].


              [1] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/rpc-jig
              [2] http://www.pipetree.com/jabber/jrpc/
              [3] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
            • Simon Fell
              Thanks for the pointers, reading over them now. I would see supporting one way async & multi-hop scenario s to be critical long term. Cheers Simon
              Message 6 of 13 , Oct 29, 2001
                Thanks for the pointers, reading over them now. I would see supporting
                one way async & multi-hop scenario's to be critical long term.

                Cheers
                Simon

                On Mon, 29 Oct 2001 18:59:58 -0000, in soap you wrote:

                >--- In soapbuilders@y..., Simon Fell <soap@z...> wrote:
                >> Hi Paul,
                >>
                >> So that's the TCP one done [pretty trivial]. Any tips on getting
                >your
                >> Jabber server up and running, i have a clean W2k box here running
                >
                >Hi
                >
                >There's currently a discussion going on over on the Jabber RPC
                >interest group list [1] that's discussing the formalisation of SOAP
                >messages over Jabber.
                >
                >I've re-written the SOAP::Transport::JABBER module of SOAP::Lite to
                >reflect the current way of thinking (from the list); I've also got a
                >couple of Perl modules that do exactly the same as the Perl modules
                >for Jabber-RPC [2], but for SOAP RPC (i.e. there's a
                >Jabber::SOAP::Client and a Jabber::SOAP::Server module). It uses
                >SOAP::Lite to perform the actual serialisation/deserialisation (can
                >you say "serdes", like "modem" for modulation/demodulation? ;-)
                >
                >Bear in mind that the formalisation of SOAP messages over Jabber is
                >not complete. The Jabber::SOAP stuff, and my rewrite of the
                >SOAP::Transport::JABBER module reflects the RPC flavour of SOAP; the
                >use of Jabber to transport one-way (or multi-hop) SOAP messages (as
                >opposed to RPC request/response style) isn't there yet, as it's a
                >recent addition to the discussion.
                >
                >Oh yeah, the SOAP::Transport::JABBER re-write also allows you to
                >build SOAP responders that connect to the Jabber server backbone as
                >components, rather than connecting as clients.
                >
                >If you're interested, I could post the (early) code somewhere. I
                >haven't done yet due to, well, no excuse really ;-)
                >
                >Kind regards
                >DJ
                >
                >p.s. I don't have access to a W2K box, so I can't really advise on
                >compiling Jabber for it, but I'm pretty sure there have been some
                >recent messages on JDEV, the 'main' Jabber mailing list [3].
                >
                >
                >[1] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/rpc-jig
                >[2] http://www.pipetree.com/jabber/jrpc/
                >[3] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
                >
                >
                >
                >-----------------------------------------------------------------
                >This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to discuss implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay on-topic.
                >
                >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                >soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                >
                >
                >
                >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                >
              • Simon Fell
                I ve just put up an experiment SOAP/Jabber server following the proposal DJ outlines in the rpc-jig list. See [1] Cheers Simon [1]
                Message 7 of 13 , Oct 30, 2001
                  I've just put up an experiment SOAP/Jabber server following the
                  proposal DJ outlines in the rpc-jig list. See [1]

                  Cheers
                  Simon

                  [1]
                  http://mailman.jabber.org/pipermail/rpc-jig/2001-October/000047.html

                  On Mon, 29 Oct 2001 18:59:58 -0000, in soap you wrote:

                  >--- In soapbuilders@y..., Simon Fell <soap@z...> wrote:
                  >> Hi Paul,
                  >>
                  >> So that's the TCP one done [pretty trivial]. Any tips on getting
                  >your
                  >> Jabber server up and running, i have a clean W2k box here running
                  >
                  >Hi
                  >
                  >There's currently a discussion going on over on the Jabber RPC
                  >interest group list [1] that's discussing the formalisation of SOAP
                  >messages over Jabber.
                  >
                  >I've re-written the SOAP::Transport::JABBER module of SOAP::Lite to
                  >reflect the current way of thinking (from the list); I've also got a
                  >couple of Perl modules that do exactly the same as the Perl modules
                  >for Jabber-RPC [2], but for SOAP RPC (i.e. there's a
                  >Jabber::SOAP::Client and a Jabber::SOAP::Server module). It uses
                  >SOAP::Lite to perform the actual serialisation/deserialisation (can
                  >you say "serdes", like "modem" for modulation/demodulation? ;-)
                  >
                  >Bear in mind that the formalisation of SOAP messages over Jabber is
                  >not complete. The Jabber::SOAP stuff, and my rewrite of the
                  >SOAP::Transport::JABBER module reflects the RPC flavour of SOAP; the
                  >use of Jabber to transport one-way (or multi-hop) SOAP messages (as
                  >opposed to RPC request/response style) isn't there yet, as it's a
                  >recent addition to the discussion.
                  >
                  >Oh yeah, the SOAP::Transport::JABBER re-write also allows you to
                  >build SOAP responders that connect to the Jabber server backbone as
                  >components, rather than connecting as clients.
                  >
                  >If you're interested, I could post the (early) code somewhere. I
                  >haven't done yet due to, well, no excuse really ;-)
                  >
                  >Kind regards
                  >DJ
                  >
                  >p.s. I don't have access to a W2K box, so I can't really advise on
                  >compiling Jabber for it, but I'm pretty sure there have been some
                  >recent messages on JDEV, the 'main' Jabber mailing list [3].
                  >
                  >
                  >[1] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/rpc-jig
                  >[2] http://www.pipetree.com/jabber/jrpc/
                  >[3] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/jdev
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >-----------------------------------------------------------------
                  >This group is a forum for builders of SOAP implementations to discuss implementation and interoperability issues. Please stay on-topic.
                  >
                  >To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
                  >soapbuilders-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
                  >
                • dj.adams@gmx.net
                  ... supporting ... Hi Simon Yes indeed, it looks that way is going to be quite interesting. Until now, the SOAP-over-Jabber experiments have seemed pretty much
                  Message 8 of 13 , Nov 2 3:00 AM
                    --- In soapbuilders@y..., Simon Fell <soap@z...> wrote:
                    > Thanks for the pointers, reading over them now. I would see
                    supporting
                    > one way async & multi-hop scenario's to be critical long term.

                    Hi Simon

                    Yes indeed, it looks that way is going to be quite interesting. Until
                    now, the SOAP-over-Jabber experiments have seemed pretty much to be
                    request/response style. If you (or anyone else on this list! :-) have
                    any thoughts or wishes etc - especially those that have already used
                    one-way async and multi-hop messages - please don't hesitate to let
                    the rpc-jig [1] list know, as all input and experience is welcome.

                    [That said, I think using a simple :x: based attachment to a Jabber
                    <message/> element is probably the right way to go for these types,
                    being the most generic and therefore the most flexible...]

                    Kind regards
                    DJ (sporadic 'net connection at the moment)

                    [1] http://mailman.jabber.org/listinfo/rpc-jig
                  • Simon Fell
                    ... I ve been working from your proposal in rpc-jig[1]. Looking through the jabber docs, it appears that implies a request/response exchange [even though
                    Message 9 of 13 , Nov 2 9:20 AM
                      On Fri, 02 Nov 2001 11:00:25 -0000, in soap you wrote:

                      >--- In soapbuilders@y..., Simon Fell <soap@z...> wrote:
                      >> Thanks for the pointers, reading over them now. I would see
                      >supporting
                      >> one way async & multi-hop scenario's to be critical long term.
                      >
                      >Hi Simon
                      >
                      >Yes indeed, it looks that way is going to be quite interesting. Until
                      >now, the SOAP-over-Jabber experiments have seemed pretty much to be
                      >request/response style. If you (or anyone else on this list! :-) have
                      >any thoughts or wishes etc - especially those that have already used
                      >one-way async and multi-hop messages - please don't hesitate to let
                      >the rpc-jig [1] list know, as all input and experience is welcome.
                      >
                      >[That said, I think using a simple :x: based attachment to a Jabber
                      ><message/> element is probably the right way to go for these types,
                      >being the most generic and therefore the most flexible...]
                      >
                      >Kind regards
                      >DJ (sporadic 'net connection at the moment)

                      I've been working from your proposal in rpc-jig[1]. Looking through
                      the jabber docs, it appears that <iq> implies a request/response
                      exchange [even though its over an async transport], is that correct ?
                      if so using <message> might be better, but that would probably need an
                      additional value for the type attribute defining.

                      Cheers
                      Simon

                      [1]
                      http://mailman.jabber.org/pipermail/rpc-jig/2001-October/000016.html
                    • dj.adams@gmx.net
                      ... correct ? ... an ... Hi Simon You re right, and indeed later in the thread you pointed to on the RPC-JIG mailing list, I (and others) seemed to agree that
                      Message 10 of 13 , Nov 5 8:50 AM
                        > I've been working from your proposal in rpc-jig[1]. Looking through
                        > the jabber docs, it appears that <iq> implies a request/response
                        > exchange [even though its over an async transport], is that
                        correct ?
                        > if so using <message> might be better, but that would probably need
                        an
                        > additional value for the type attribute defining.

                        Hi Simon

                        You're right, and indeed later in the thread you pointed to on the
                        RPC-JIG mailing list, I (and others) seemed to agree that the
                        <message/> element could be used as well [1]. That is to say, the IQ
                        model is appropriate for request/response usages of SOAP, and the
                        message model is appropriate for the async, one-way and multi-hop
                        usages. There's no reason why we need to restrict ourselves to just
                        one Jabber element. I think I drew a parallel somewhere in that
                        thread to the split-personality of many of the standard jabber:
                        namespaces, e.g. jabber:x:oob and jabber:iq:oob.

                        May I humbly suggest we continue this on the RPC-JIG list, so as not
                        to lose focus or messages?

                        Thanks, and thanks for your input
                        dj

                        [1] http://mailman.jabber.org/pipermail/rpc-jig/2001-
                        October/000045.html
                      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.