# Open Payments and SPSP

**URL:** https://forum.interledger.org/t/open-payments-and-spsp/983
**Category:** Protocol Design
**Tags:** spsp, application-layer
**Created:** [April 15, 2020, 5:12pm UTC](https://forum.interledger.org/t/open-payments-and-spsp/983 "2020-04-15T17:12:19Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 14

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![adrianhopebailie](https://yyz1.discourse-cdn.com/flex031/user_avatar/forum.interledger.org/adrianhopebailie/32/31_2.png) [@adrianhopebailie](https://forum.interledger.org/u/adrianhopebailie)
#### Post date: [April 20, 2020, 7:52am UTC](https://forum.interledger.org/t/open-payments-and-spsp/983/14 "2020-04-20T07:52:28Z")

</div>

> [@kincaid](#):
>
> I’m not entirely sold on differentiating the type of request based on content types, but don’t have strong opinions on that 👍

I think it’s the best we have that HTTP already offers. By using headers we get a lot of support in things like ingress for differential routing so I think it must be either header or path based.

We COULD use a URL param but that seems odd in a POST… or maybe not?  
i.e. PP = `$wallet.example/alice`, URL to POST to for new invoice = `https://wallet.example/alice?resource=invoice`

> [@kincaid](#):
>
> I think about, what is SPSP/this mode used for?

I agree with your logic but I don’t agree that the media type should indicate the purpose, it indicates the type. i.e. If you do a GET and you want to get back STREAM credentials then ask for that type (irrespective of what you will use them for).

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.interledger.org/t/open-payments-and-spsp/983)._