From owner-freebsd-hackers Fri Jan 30 23:09:05 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA01339 for hackers-outgoing; Fri, 30 Jan 1998 23:09:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from smtp01.primenet.com (smtp01.primenet.com [206.165.6.131]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id XAA01305 for ; Fri, 30 Jan 1998 23:09:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tlambert@usr06.primenet.com) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by smtp01.primenet.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id AAA13513; Sat, 31 Jan 1998 00:08:18 -0700 (MST) Received: from usr06.primenet.com(206.165.6.206) via SMTP by smtp01.primenet.com, id smtpd013506; Sat Jan 31 00:08:16 1998 Received: (from tlambert@localhost) by usr06.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id AAA01106; Sat, 31 Jan 1998 00:08:03 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199801310708.AAA01106@usr06.primenet.com> Subject: Re: WebAdmin To: abelits@phobos.illtel.denver.co.us (Alex Belits) Date: Sat, 31 Jan 1998 07:08:03 +0000 (GMT) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com, rivers@dignus.com, mike@smith.net.au, capriotti0@hotmail.com, capriotti@geocities.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, joe.shevland@horizonti.com In-Reply-To: from "Alex Belits" at Jan 30, 98 04:27:00 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG X-To-Unsubscribe: mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org "unsubscribe hackers" > [atomic transaction over LDAP skipped] > > Yes, but why? My proposal to use HTTP is based in part on the ease of > transactions handling over it. HTTP doesn't necessarily mean HTML and > interactivity, it can, say, use URL-encoded list of key-value > pairs symmetrically (both from server and to server as opposed to HTML > form from server and URL-encoded form upload to server) and provide HTML > only if the user is working in a browser. That will allow more > flexibility, easier configuration replication, etc. I think that the atomicity of the transaction for HTML is an implementation detal; a detail best served by defineing how a transaction is to take place. That the HTML post is a "transaction" is seperate from "what to do when an HTML post is seen and you are an HTML server". Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.