Re: Pushing vs. Pulling

[Daniel Manley <dmanley@tucows.com>]

Edward Lewis wrote:

>
>BTW, the Push-Pull straw poll did have one benefit.  Scott suggested that
>polling is a MUST, pushing a MAY.  Perhaps this is the middle ground to
>build upon.  (Comments on this, please.)
>
The argument that the protocol have a base set of MUSTs and any number 
of MAYs for extensions (sometimes registry-specific), IMHO, somewhat 
undoes what were trying to do, right?

Let's say the group favours a MUST for Poll and a MAY for Push.  All 
registries would implement Poll because they MUST and some registries 
MAY additionally implement Push.  If a registrar is using the same 
client software to connect to [all] EPP registries, they would implement 
Poll because they MUST, but what would be incentive for the registrar to 
implement Push code if Pull is working fine?

Is there a problem with a protocol that is too accomodating?  Could a 
single protocol that is "too" extensible eventually fracture into 
multiple protocols?  (although these last two questions might get me a 
little out of scope of the original email)

Dan