Subject: Start on OPES protocol work

From: Markus Hofmann <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2003 18:52:21 -0500

Folks,

with the first two WG drafts being approved by the IESG (architecture, 
protocol requirements), and three others under IESG review (scenarios, 
threats, policy requirements), it's time to get started on  the 
protocol work!!

As a starting point, I'd suggest everyone to familiarize 
herself/himself with the OPES Protocol Requirements Draft 
(draft-ietf-opes-protocol-reqs-03). It will provide guidance on 
fundamental questions we'll have to answer before trying to 
settle/define a protocol, such as

   - what type of interactions need to be supported (e.g. pure
     request/response, or request with multiple replies, or...)
   - what type of data is exchanged in requests and replies
   - what are the security requirements
   - etc.

We also need to keep performance expectations in mind, which might 
impact the decision whether to go binary, text, highly structured 
(e.g. XML) etc.

Based on the answers to these questions, we can then discuss and pick 
the most suitable protocol. I'm hesitating to list "candidate 
protocols" since it would *not* be a good idea to talk about specific 
protocols without having discussed the answers to above questions, but 
in the past the following options have been mentioned at some point 
(without a specific order!!):

  - ICAP
  - ICAP "next generation"
  - SOAP/XML
  - "Something" over BEEP
  - Binary protocol
  - more...

I would expect that we'll have some lively discussion on the protocol 
issue here on the mailing list, and that we continue and intensify the 
discussions at a meeting in San Francisco.

Also consider this a call for agenda items for the next IETF meeting, 
and send Marshall and myself agenda requests related to the protocol 
issue.

So please, let's get started here on the mailing list, keep your 
thoughts and opinions coming.

Thanks,
   Markus

---

From: Marshall Rose <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2003 15:51:14 -0800

> thoughts and opinions coming.

just so everyone's clear on this: the "fun" part now begins. however,
markus and i need a reason to schedule a wg meeting in san francisco,
and we need that reason by february 25th (11 days from now).

what this means is that the metabolism of this list needs to pick-up
substantially so we know there will be something to actually discuss in
san francisco...

/mtr