Lists Home |
Date Index |
On Monday 18 February 2002 12:23 am, Paul Prescod wrote:
> Dave Winer wrote:
> > BTW, last time I checked HTTP was synchronous.
> > Maybe I missed something.
> What do you mean by synchronous? Is SMTP asynchronous? If so, so is
> * http://www.prescod.net/asynchhttp.html
In which case, it's just as asynchronous as anything on this Earth. What's a
synchronous protocol, by this definition? CORBA isn't, and neither is ONC RPC
I'd say that SMTP is asynchronous since the only responses allowed in an SMTP
sending session are immediate handling of certain errors. To actual perform
an entire transaction, a message is sent and a reply received - which occur
in *seperate* SMTP sessions.
In HTTP, you send a request and get back a response in the *same* HTTP
session. That's the synchronicity. Of course you can define the request to
contain a reply address and the response to contain a simple 'received' or
'not received' and make it asynchronous. But it's not intrinsically so;
unless you make that extra effort, it'll be synchronous.
Alaric B. Snell
http://www.alaric-snell.com/ http://RFC.net/ http://www.warhead.org.uk/
Any sufficiently advanced technology can be emulated in software