B
bronco
Guest
I fully understand where the APSV comes from (using it since 1998). In a changing world little revamping this transport would hurt (tip: use the http header Accept header to differrentiate between old and new
). What would be a plus for the current ABL client model (including OpenClient) is a convergence of capabilities between ABL and true HTTP clients. Apart from load-balancing, OAuth2 is another example. You can't set a bearer token to the ABL call (which are http based nowaday as well) thus whatever OAuth2 solution you come up with for the WEB protocol won't work with the ABL client. Just for the record (to avoid the idea that I'm being negative), I love where it's going with PASOE. What is offered with WEB transport w/ spring security is giving us a good story to our customers (and they like it).
Continue reading...
). What would be a plus for the current ABL client model (including OpenClient) is a convergence of capabilities between ABL and true HTTP clients. Apart from load-balancing, OAuth2 is another example. You can't set a bearer token to the ABL call (which are http based nowaday as well) thus whatever OAuth2 solution you come up with for the WEB protocol won't work with the ABL client. Just for the record (to avoid the idea that I'm being negative), I love where it's going with PASOE. What is offered with WEB transport w/ spring security is giving us a good story to our customers (and they like it).Continue reading...