[eikenberry]

+1 and I'll bump it up a notch... not only should you ignore REST you should ignore URLs. You want to write protocols, not APIs. Redis, for example, has a better "API" than any web API I've used. Easy to use, easy to wrap, easy to extend and version. HTTP is the other obvious example that I shouldn't have to go into.

If you'd like a good back and forth on the idea the classic c2 page is a great resource. http://wiki.c2.com/?ApiVsProtocol

[nine_k]

Don't ignore URLs completely! They are great for namespacing and versioning.

[eikenberry]

Why add the additional complexity of multiple connection points? Protocols support both of those operations perfectly well and it seems that adding URLs would just confuse things.

[liquidgecka]

Because at some point you will need to deprecate ciphers and when you do you don't want old clients to explode. The domain is the way you version connection requirements so you can support old clients with crappy ssl options without screwing up the security of new clients.

[kiitos]

HTTP is itself a protocol, and URLs are part of that protocol. They're not really "connection points" in any meaningful sense.

[nine_k]

Sometimes all you got is port 443, and adding subdomains is a non-zero hassle, especially if you serve all off the APIs from the same code anyway.

[eikenberry]

You don't need subdomains or other ports because you encapsulate everything in the protocol. A system that works on a protocol only really needs a data socket which can be simulated pretty easily via any URL with the POSTs working as a bursty stream.