We kind of have to specify them in the ebMS specification, for interoperability purposes. -Matt On 21-Jul-04, at 6:17 AM, Bryan Rasmussen wrote: > Maybe it would be a good idea to have some library where ebxml > bindings to > different protocols could be found. Is there already such a resource. > That > seems like the kind of useful tool that spurs technology adoption. > > > > -----Oprindelig meddelelse----- > Fra: Matthew MacKenzie [mailto:matt@mac-kenzie.net] > Sendt: 15. juli 2004 14:27 > Til: Pim van der Eijk > Cc: Bryan Rasmussen; ebxml-dev@lists.ebxml.org > Emne: Re: FTP protocol support and use > > > The only problems I could foresee with FTP with regards to > interoperability is ftp command sequence and Passive mode. If the > message is a full mime message, and people stuck to a set command > sequence (e.g. cd ebxml; put <mid>) then things should be fairly > straight forward. > > -Matt > > On 15-Jul-04, at 9:18 AM, Pim van der Eijk wrote: > >> >> Hello, >> >> On a related note, in a customer environment, FTP is the de facto >> app-to-app data exchange protocol. >> It is used in several large scale production systems, is supported by >> the network management >> organization, allowed through gateways/firewalls etc. To introduce a >> technology like ebXML Messaging >> here, the ability to leverage this infrastructure would be an >> advantage. >> >> I noted that whereas the CPPA specification (section 8.4.38) seems to >> treat FTP as a supported >> protocol on a same level as HTTP and SMTP and has several useful >> guidelines, the ebXML Messaging >> specification (appendix B) only discusses bindings to HTTP and SMTP. I >> am interested in learning >> about any issues with FTP one should be aware of, in particular >> interoperability issues. >> >> Also, I would appreciate (anonymized) pointers to deployed ebMS >> solutions that use ebMS over FTP. >> >> Kind regards, >> >> Pim van der Eijk >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Matthew MacKenzie [mailto:matt@mac-kenzie.net] >> Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 1:16 PM >> To: Bryan Rasmussen >> Cc: ebxml-dev@lists.ebxml.org >> Subject: Re: message service agnosticism and http bindings >> >> Bryan, >> >> My experience is that HTTP is definitely the leader in usage, but SMTP >> is also used fairly often. >> Other protocols are on the fringes, mostly because we don't define how >> to bind them in the >> specification. >> >> Regards, >> Matthew MacKenzie >> Sr. Architect, Adobe Systems >> Editor, OASIS ebXML Messaging TC >> >> >> On 15-Jul-04, at 6:17 AM, Bryan Rasmussen wrote: >> >>> >>> Anyone have any in the field observations as to how often http is >>> used >>> for the message service and how often other protocols? If there are >>> any particular protocols that are widely used in competition with >>> http >>> in this case I would appreciate a note. >>> >>> The ebxml-dev list is sponsored by OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> >>> The list archives are at http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-dev/ >>> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription >>> manager: >>> <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/> >>> >> >> >> The ebxml-dev list is sponsored by OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> >> The list archives are at >> http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-dev/ >> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription >> manager: >> <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/> >> >> >> The ebxml-dev list is sponsored by OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org> The list archives are at http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-dev/ To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription manager: <http://www.oasis-open.org/mlmanage/>
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>