You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to xmlrpc-dev@ws.apache.org by Ryan Hoegg <rh...@isisnetworks.net> on 2002/03/08 19:35:17 UTC
XML-RPC and HTTP
Hey that last piece on HTTP headers got me to thinking. The XML-RPC
spec says that an XML-RPC message is an HTTP-POST request. However when
I was looking around on the internet I remember seeing stuff about
possible other transports such as SMTP. Were these just ideas that were
being thrown around early on or are people still interested in doing it
this way? The actual messages don't seem to me to be reliant on HTTP.
And if other transports are desirable, should we abstract the transport
part?
Just thinking out loud,
Ryan Hoegg
Re: XML-RPC and HTTP
Posted by John Wilson <tu...@wilson.co.uk>.
There have certainly been SMTP implementations which use the XML-RPC message
format. There's a Jabber protocol which uses the format too
(http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0009.html).
John Wilson
The Wilson Partnership
http://www.wilson.co.uk
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan Hoegg" <rh...@isisnetworks.net>
To: <rp...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 6:35 PM
Subject: XML-RPC and HTTP
> Hey that last piece on HTTP headers got me to thinking. The XML-RPC
> spec says that an XML-RPC message is an HTTP-POST request. However when
> I was looking around on the internet I remember seeing stuff about
> possible other transports such as SMTP. Were these just ideas that were
> being thrown around early on or are people still interested in doing it
> this way? The actual messages don't seem to me to be reliant on HTTP.
Re: XML-RPC and HTTP
Posted by John Wilson <tu...@wilson.co.uk>.
There have certainly been SMTP implementations which use the XML-RPC message
format. There's a Jabber protocol which uses the format too
(http://www.jabber.org/jeps/jep-0009.html).
John Wilson
The Wilson Partnership
http://www.wilson.co.uk
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan Hoegg" <rh...@isisnetworks.net>
To: <rp...@xml.apache.org>
Sent: Friday, March 08, 2002 6:35 PM
Subject: XML-RPC and HTTP
> Hey that last piece on HTTP headers got me to thinking. The XML-RPC
> spec says that an XML-RPC message is an HTTP-POST request. However when
> I was looking around on the internet I remember seeing stuff about
> possible other transports such as SMTP. Were these just ideas that were
> being thrown around early on or are people still interested in doing it
> this way? The actual messages don't seem to me to be reliant on HTTP.
Re: [patch] fix javadoc warnings
Posted by Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>.
Martin, did you get your karma yet? If so, +1 on committing. If not,
mail Geir and ask for it.
- Dan
Martin Poeschl <mp...@marmot.at> writes:
> Index: ./src/java/org/apache/xmlrpc/WebServer.java
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /home/cvspublic/xml-rpc/src/java/org/apache/xmlrpc/WebServer.java,v
> retrieving revision 1.9
> diff -u -r1.9 WebServer.java
> --- ./src/java/org/apache/xmlrpc/WebServer.java 6 Mar 2002 15:52:56 -0000 1.9
> +++ ./src/java/org/apache/xmlrpc/WebServer.java 10 Mar 2002 12:59:48 -0000
> @@ -219,8 +219,8 @@
>
> /**
> * Switch client filtering on/off.
> - * @see acceptClient(java.lang.String)
> - * @see denyClient(java.lang.String)
> + * @see #acceptClient(java.lang.String)
> + * @see #denyClient(java.lang.String)
> */
> public void setParanoid(boolean p)
> {
> @@ -232,8 +232,8 @@
> * character, e.g. "192.168.*.*". You must call setParanoid(true) in order for this to have any
> * effect.
> *
> - * @see denyClient(java.lang.String)
> - * @see setParanoid(boolean)
> + * @see #denyClient(java.lang.String)
> + * @see #setParanoid(boolean)
> */
> public void acceptClient(String address)
> throws IllegalArgumentException
> @@ -256,8 +256,8 @@
> * character, e.g. "192.168.*.*". You must call setParanoid(true) in order for this to have any
> * effect.
> *
> - * @see acceptClient(java.lang.String)
> - * @see setParanoid(boolean)
> + * @see #acceptClient(java.lang.String)
> + * @see #setParanoid(boolean)
> */
> public void denyClient(String address) throws IllegalArgumentException
> {
>
> The command completed successfully.ÿÿÿA
Re: [patch] fix javadoc warnings
Posted by Daniel Rall <dl...@finemaltcoding.com>.
Martin, did you get your karma yet? If so, +1 on committing. If not,
mail Geir and ask for it.
- Dan
Martin Poeschl <mp...@marmot.at> writes:
> Index: ./src/java/org/apache/xmlrpc/WebServer.java
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /home/cvspublic/xml-rpc/src/java/org/apache/xmlrpc/WebServer.java,v
> retrieving revision 1.9
> diff -u -r1.9 WebServer.java
> --- ./src/java/org/apache/xmlrpc/WebServer.java 6 Mar 2002 15:52:56 -0000 1.9
> +++ ./src/java/org/apache/xmlrpc/WebServer.java 10 Mar 2002 12:59:48 -0000
> @@ -219,8 +219,8 @@
>
> /**
> * Switch client filtering on/off.
> - * @see acceptClient(java.lang.String)
> - * @see denyClient(java.lang.String)
> + * @see #acceptClient(java.lang.String)
> + * @see #denyClient(java.lang.String)
> */
> public void setParanoid(boolean p)
> {
> @@ -232,8 +232,8 @@
> * character, e.g. "192.168.*.*". You must call setParanoid(true) in order for this to have any
> * effect.
> *
> - * @see denyClient(java.lang.String)
> - * @see setParanoid(boolean)
> + * @see #denyClient(java.lang.String)
> + * @see #setParanoid(boolean)
> */
> public void acceptClient(String address)
> throws IllegalArgumentException
> @@ -256,8 +256,8 @@
> * character, e.g. "192.168.*.*". You must call setParanoid(true) in order for this to have any
> * effect.
> *
> - * @see acceptClient(java.lang.String)
> - * @see setParanoid(boolean)
> + * @see #acceptClient(java.lang.String)
> + * @see #setParanoid(boolean)
> */
> public void denyClient(String address) throws IllegalArgumentException
> {
>
> The command completed successfully.ÿÿÿA
[patch] fix javadoc warnings
Posted by Martin Poeschl <mp...@marmot.at>.
Index: ./src/java/org/apache/xmlrpc/WebServer.java
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/xml-rpc/src/java/org/apache/xmlrpc/WebServer.java,v
retrieving revision 1.9
diff -u -r1.9 WebServer.java
--- ./src/java/org/apache/xmlrpc/WebServer.java 6 Mar 2002 15:52:56 -0000 1.9
+++ ./src/java/org/apache/xmlrpc/WebServer.java 10 Mar 2002 12:59:48 -0000
@@ -219,8 +219,8 @@
/**
* Switch client filtering on/off.
- * @see acceptClient(java.lang.String)
- * @see denyClient(java.lang.String)
+ * @see #acceptClient(java.lang.String)
+ * @see #denyClient(java.lang.String)
*/
public void setParanoid(boolean p)
{
@@ -232,8 +232,8 @@
* character, e.g. "192.168.*.*". You must call setParanoid(true) in order for this to have any
* effect.
*
- * @see denyClient(java.lang.String)
- * @see setParanoid(boolean)
+ * @see #denyClient(java.lang.String)
+ * @see #setParanoid(boolean)
*/
public void acceptClient(String address)
throws IllegalArgumentException
@@ -256,8 +256,8 @@
* character, e.g. "192.168.*.*". You must call setParanoid(true) in order for this to have any
* effect.
*
- * @see acceptClient(java.lang.String)
- * @see setParanoid(boolean)
+ * @see #acceptClient(java.lang.String)
+ * @see #setParanoid(boolean)
*/
public void denyClient(String address) throws IllegalArgumentException
{
The command completed successfully.ÿÿÿA
[patch] fix javadoc warnings
Posted by Martin Poeschl <mp...@marmot.at>.
Index: ./src/java/org/apache/xmlrpc/WebServer.java
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/cvspublic/xml-rpc/src/java/org/apache/xmlrpc/WebServer.java,v
retrieving revision 1.9
diff -u -r1.9 WebServer.java
--- ./src/java/org/apache/xmlrpc/WebServer.java 6 Mar 2002 15:52:56 -0000 1.9
+++ ./src/java/org/apache/xmlrpc/WebServer.java 10 Mar 2002 12:59:48 -0000
@@ -219,8 +219,8 @@
/**
* Switch client filtering on/off.
- * @see acceptClient(java.lang.String)
- * @see denyClient(java.lang.String)
+ * @see #acceptClient(java.lang.String)
+ * @see #denyClient(java.lang.String)
*/
public void setParanoid(boolean p)
{
@@ -232,8 +232,8 @@
* character, e.g. "192.168.*.*". You must call setParanoid(true) in order for this to have any
* effect.
*
- * @see denyClient(java.lang.String)
- * @see setParanoid(boolean)
+ * @see #denyClient(java.lang.String)
+ * @see #setParanoid(boolean)
*/
public void acceptClient(String address)
throws IllegalArgumentException
@@ -256,8 +256,8 @@
* character, e.g. "192.168.*.*". You must call setParanoid(true) in order for this to have any
* effect.
*
- * @see acceptClient(java.lang.String)
- * @see setParanoid(boolean)
+ * @see #acceptClient(java.lang.String)
+ * @see #setParanoid(boolean)
*/
public void denyClient(String address) throws IllegalArgumentException
{
The command completed successfully.ÿÿÿA
Re: XML-RPC and HTTP
Posted by ward harold <wa...@yahoo.com>.
I've actually begun exploring this avenue. It is
trivial to separate the wire format from the transport
aspects of the specficiation. Once you've done that
adding support, in the specification, for a new
transport is just a matter of describing how the
transport transfers messages in the XML-RPC wire
format between clients and servers.
I was going to send my modified version of the spec to
Dave Winer once I'm done adapting the SOAP profile for
BEEP to XML-RPC, that would provide an example of a
second transport mapping, to get his thoughts. If
anyone else is interested let me know.
I don't think abstracting the transport in the code
would be too difficult. Once I have the XML-RPC
profile implemented I'll be in a better position to
judge. I think the key is to keep this very
lightweight, i.e., do let it turn into another SOAP.
... WkH
--- Ryan Hoegg <rh...@isisnetworks.net> wrote:
> Hey that last piece on HTTP headers got me to
> thinking. The XML-RPC
> spec says that an XML-RPC message is an HTTP-POST
> request. However when
> I was looking around on the internet I remember
> seeing stuff about
> possible other transports such as SMTP. Were these
> just ideas that were
> being thrown around early on or are people still
> interested in doing it
> this way? The actual messages don't seem to me to
> be reliant on HTTP.
>
> And if other transports are desirable, should we
> abstract the transport
> part?
>
> Just thinking out loud,
> Ryan Hoegg
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
Re: XML-RPC and HTTP
Posted by ward harold <wa...@yahoo.com>.
I've actually begun exploring this avenue. It is
trivial to separate the wire format from the transport
aspects of the specficiation. Once you've done that
adding support, in the specification, for a new
transport is just a matter of describing how the
transport transfers messages in the XML-RPC wire
format between clients and servers.
I was going to send my modified version of the spec to
Dave Winer once I'm done adapting the SOAP profile for
BEEP to XML-RPC, that would provide an example of a
second transport mapping, to get his thoughts. If
anyone else is interested let me know.
I don't think abstracting the transport in the code
would be too difficult. Once I have the XML-RPC
profile implemented I'll be in a better position to
judge. I think the key is to keep this very
lightweight, i.e., do let it turn into another SOAP.
... WkH
--- Ryan Hoegg <rh...@isisnetworks.net> wrote:
> Hey that last piece on HTTP headers got me to
> thinking. The XML-RPC
> spec says that an XML-RPC message is an HTTP-POST
> request. However when
> I was looking around on the internet I remember
> seeing stuff about
> possible other transports such as SMTP. Were these
> just ideas that were
> being thrown around early on or are people still
> interested in doing it
> this way? The actual messages don't seem to me to
> be reliant on HTTP.
>
> And if other transports are desirable, should we
> abstract the transport
> part?
>
> Just thinking out loud,
> Ryan Hoegg
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email!
http://mail.yahoo.com/