RFC 3252:Binary Lexical Octet Ad-hoc Transport
RFC-Ref

1. Introduction

1.1. Overview

   This document describes the Binary Lexical Octet Ad-hoc Transport
   (BLOAT): a reformulation of a widely-deployed network-layer protocol
   (IP [RFC791]), and two associated transport layer protocols (TCP
   [RFC793] and UDP [RFC768]) as XML [XML] applications.  It also
   describes methods for transporting BLOAT over Ethernet and IEEE 802
   networks as well as encapsulating BLOAT in IP for gatewaying BLOAT
   across the public Internet.

1.2. Motivation

   The wild popularity of XML as a basis for application-level protocols
   such as the Blocks Extensible Exchange Protocol [RFC3080], the Simple
   Object Access Protocol [SOAP], and Jabber [JABBER] prompted
   investigation into the possibility of extending the use of XML in the
   protocol stack.  Using XML at both the transport and network layer in
   addition to the application layer would provide for an amazing amount
   of power and flexibility while removing dependencies on proprietary
   and hard-to-understand binary protocols.  This protocol unification
   would also allow applications to use a single XML parser for all
   aspects of their operation, eliminating developer time spent figuring
   out the intricacies of each new protocol, and moving the hard work of

   parsing to the XML toolset.  The use of XML also mitigates concerns
   over "network vs. host" byte ordering which is at the root of many
   network application bugs.

1.3. Relation to Existing Protocols

   The reformulations specified in this RFC follow as closely as
   possible the spirit of the RFCs on which they are based, and so MAY
   contain elements or attributes that would not be needed in a pure
   reworking (e.g. length attributes, which are implicit in XML.)

   The layering of network and transport protocols are maintained in
   this RFC despite the optimizations that could be made if the line
   were somewhat blurred (i.e. merging TCP and IP into a single, larger
   element in the DTD) in order to foster future use of this protocol as
   a basis for reformulating other protocols (such as ICMP.)

   Other than the encoding, the behavioral aspects of each of the
   existing protocols remain unchanged.  Routing, address spaces, TCP
   congestion control, etc. behave as specified in the extant standards.
   Adapting to new standards and experimental algorithm heuristics for
   improving performance will become much easier once the move to BLOAT
   has been completed.

1.4. Requirement Levels

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
   document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14, RFC 2119
   [RFC2119].

Google
Web
RFC-Ref