RE: [xml-dev] SOAP and Firewalls

From
Michael Brennan <>
To
'Paul Prescod' <>,
Date
2002-02-21T23:27:22Z
ID
<D7155AD41ECFD511AF4A00B0D0202CB51DFE3A@MAILHOST>
Thread
RE: [xml-dev] SOAP and Firewalls
> From: Paul Prescod [mailto:]

<snip/>

> I think you misread my proposal. (maybe)
> 
> I'm asking people who are not interested in conforming to Web
> architecture merely to change their end-point URIs from
> 
> http://www.foo.bar/myservice
> 
> to
> 
> http://www.foo.bar:987/myservice
> 
> We could make it even easier. We could define a SOAP URI that implied
> the ":987" bit.

Your right. I did misread it. If it's as simple as recommending that
developers use a different port without throwing out all those HTTP-oriented
tools for doing it, then that's fine with me. However -- to be honest -- my
firewall administrator is going to ask me why I can't just use port 80. But
in terms of defining SOAP specs and best practices, and getting the vendors
thinking more about best practices, this is just fine with me.