25 Jan
2005
25 Jan
'05
9:29 a.m.
Juha,
Yes, I completely agree with you. However, I don't need to read the spec and
far from understand it before I use it... ;-) So I did start to look at
SOAP and have very good experiences, both in terms of usability and
scalability.
But, I don't have strong opinions, if the people who are going to use
the interface are all against SOAP, XMLRPC is the right choice.
The xmlrpc-provisioning work you have done, can it be coordinated with
Andreas' effort?
g-)
Juha Heinanen wrote:
Greger V. Teigre writes:
As I indicated in an earlier email, I would be
interested in taking
part in a joint effort to further develop ser's high-availability
and scalability (HAS). I would probably have to do some development
anyway, and I would prefer to see such support in the public domain.
In Nov/Dec I called for responses on a SOAP-based provisioning
interface, but heard nothing,
so here is an overlap of interests.
greger,
we have done some work on xmlprc based provisioning and it looks
promising. xmlrpc spec is three pages long and even i can understand
it. soap spec, on the other hand, is far too thick and goes way above
my head.
-- juha