9fans - fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "matt" <matt@proweb.co.uk>
To: <9fans@cse.psu.edu>
Subject: Re: [9fans] HTTP tunnelling of 9P -- taboo?
Date: Mon,  4 Nov 2002 23:04:29 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <00e601c28456$8810ee20$6501a8c0@KIKE> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9ac56b3938baa3accb55d587a63f662a@9srv.net>


> is the fact that WebDAV is a set of http "extentions" really a
> selling point for most of its users? i doubt it.

lack of unified document management tools for web authoring is the key to
it's appeal

"it works in a browser" is certainly a selling point, the many windowed
desktop is too noisy, user context switches seem less expensive inside the
same application - witness ftp in a browser etc.etc. For years I've bemoaned
the death of the application and the rich controls available to application
programmers. The people at my latest job were delighted when I switched them
from browser based <textarea> maintenance to "use a text editor & ftp" !

The biggest headache for many a web development house once the first
iteration is out of the door is maintenance.
Clients *never* ask about it, their focus is on what the customer will see.
Very rarely have they even considered what pages they themselves will want
and need [and it's a contract winner to mention it - makes you sound
professional].

The webDav FAQ provides the most compelling reason for massive wheel
re-invention : efficiency !!

http://www.webdav.org/other/faq.html#Q19

Q. Why should I use DAV instead of FTP?
A. Since DAV works over HTTP, you get all the benefits of HTTP that FTP
cannot provide. For example: strong authentication, encryption, proxy
support, and caching. It is true that you can get some of this through SSH,
but the HTTP infrastructure is much more widely deployed than SSH. Further,
SSH does not have the wide complement of tools, development libraries, and
applications that HTTP does.
DAV transfers (well, HTTP transfers) are also more efficient than FTP. You
can pipeline multiple transfers through a single TCP connection, whereas FTP
requires a new connection for each file transferred (plus the control
connection).


So, there you have it, re-tool your business to WebDAV and you can save a
few TCP connections

M


---
Outgoing mail is certified as idiotic.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.408 / Virus Database: 230 - Release Date: 25/10/2002



  reply	other threads:[~2002-11-04 23:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2002-11-04 21:38 a
2002-11-04 23:04 ` matt [this message]
2002-11-05 10:14   ` Boyd Roberts
2002-11-05 16:47   ` peter huang
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-11-04 22:04 Geoff Collyer
2002-11-04 19:02 Skip Tavakkolian
2002-11-04 15:44 Skip Tavakkolian

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='00e601c28456$8810ee20$6501a8c0@KIKE' \
    --to=matt@proweb.co.uk \
    --cc=9fans@cse.psu.edu \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).