Difference between revisions of "Talk:Reverse HTTP"

Revision as of 06:06, 8 March 2009

What applications are there for this? I'm having trouble envisioning a problem that fits this solution. -- Strife Onizuka 13:26, 14 May 2008 (PDT)

Strife, every problem containing symmetrical higher-level relationships between two parties could fit this solution. It's easy to find examples.

As one example of direct relevance to our current MMOX work at the IETF, consider two interoperating virtual world providers, who as peers are perfectly symmetrical in their relationship to each other at the VW level, but one of which is isolated from incoming external access within a corporate protection domain. Reverse HTTP would allow totally symmetric application-level operation, despite the assymetry at the TCP level. Morgaine Dinova 14:06, 8 March 2009 (UTC)

Is there a reason 204 No Content isn't being used ? - SignpostMarv Martin 08:16, 14 July 2008 (PDT)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 What applications are there for this? I'm having trouble envisioning a problem that fits this solution. -- [[User:Strife Onizuka|Strife Onizuka]] 13:26, 14 May 2008 (PDT)
+* Strife, every problem containing symmetrical higher-level relationships between two parties could fit this solution.  It's easy to find examples.
+* As one example of direct relevance to our current MMOX work at the IETF, consider two interoperating virtual world providers, who as peers are perfectly symmetrical in their relationship to each other at the VW level, but one of which is isolated from incoming external access within a corporate protection domain. Reverse HTTP would allow totally symmetric application-level operation, despite the assymetry at the TCP level. [[User:Morgaine Dinova|Morgaine Dinova]] 14:06, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 == empty response body ==