Open jeremydmiller opened 1 month ago
I like the idea of having a "simple" transport which works without additional infrastructure.HTTP plays nice with firewalls and proxys and encryption is a solved problem via HTTPS. I would suggest using websockets for live events, but offer a plain http endpoint with batch support as a fallback where WS are not feasible or not desired.
@Arne-B I think we'd opt for a SignalR transport (finally) if we did that. I've done custom web sockets before, but I'm not wanting to sign up for that one ever again!
@jeremydmiller fair enough, been there... Since SignalR can use different kinds of transports, and WS(S) is one of them, it might even bring more flexibility. Since there are also clients readily available for different languages , I see that as a plus for easy integration.
Problem
You know what technology is really, really good at request/reply mechanics? Good ol' fashioned HTTP.
What I'd like to propose is two things:
IMessageBus.InvokeAsync<T>()
to do a remote request/reply, it can "see" that the message would be using HTTP and, issue a single request w/ expected reply via HTTPMechanics
What about Security?
Dunno, something to figure out to make any of this feasible.
Jasper (Wolverine's predecessor) actually had a generic HTTP messaging transport that could send batches of messages between Wolverine applications. Cool, but it got thrown away before even Jasper went 1.0.