• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: XML, routing
• From: Miles Sabin <miles@m...>
• Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2002 21:57:05 +0100
• In-reply-to: <r01050400-1021-8CA0F3AEE20E11D69C3D0003937A08C2@[192.168.124.21]>
• References: <r01050400-1021-8CA0F3AEE20E11D69C3D0003937A08C2@[192.168.124.21]>

Simon St.Laurent wrote,
> If, as I suspect, this kind of routing starts out on top of an HTTP
> (or even) IP foundation which can later be shifted to whatever seems
> convenient, we may find that situation changing.  I have to admit
> that I marveled at how transparent the switchover from
> NetBEUI/whatever to TCP/IP felt over successive versions of Windows.

Right, but isn't the lesson of NetBEUI (and IPX and DECnet and 
AppleTalk) that proprietary protocols have a tough time surviving even 
in closed environments ... because the pressure to be not _completely_ 
closed is irresistable in almost all cases.

Cheers,


Miles

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: XML, routing
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • Re: XML, routing
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: Perl Filter Implementation of JITTs
• Next by Date: Re: XML, routing
• Previous by thread: Re: XML, routing
• Next by thread: Re: XML, routing
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread