Date: Sat, 31 Jan 1998 07:08:03 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: abelits@phobos.illtel.denver.co.us (Alex Belits) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com, rivers@dignus.com, mike@smith.net.au, capriotti0@hotmail.com, capriotti@geocities.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG, joe.shevland@horizonti.com Subject: Re: WebAdmin Message-ID: <199801310708.AAA01106@usr06.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.96.980130161445.5830A-100000@phobos.illtel.denver.co.us> from "Alex Belits" at Jan 30, 98 04:27:00 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> [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.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199801310708.AAA01106>