Applications Messaging Standard

[Alasdair Allan]

Doug Tody wrote:
> I guess I agree that a simple peer-to-peer interface (basically just

Peer-to-peer built correctly, from the ground up as such, isn't  
necessary the 'simple' option. Although peer-to-peer based systems on  
the surface are much simpler, this is not intrinsically the case. In  
these systems emerging complexity may begin to appear allowing  
relatively simple pieces of software to interact to create complex  
and intricate behaviours which can progress the system towards  
desired goals.

> a socket connection with some protocol on top) is a special case.
> However a hub and a bus differ mostly in terms of efficiency, not
> semantics.  The more general messaging infrastructures support all
> the options with various degrees of performance.

Well yes and no, there are other architectures beyond peer-to-peer  
and hub/bus systems. We might not necessarily want to look at them,  
but they do exist.

Al.