RE: [regrep] Proposed changes to ebMS Binding and HTTP Binding

["Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com>]

Just one question, from more of a "perception" perspective: Does
removing the ebMS binding "break" anyone's perception (within or outside
of OASIS) of an integratable ebXML framework? Does it send a negative
message (no pun intended)? Or does it not matter whether it sends any
type of message at all?

Kind Regards,
Joseph Chiusano
Booz Allen Hamilton
Strategy and Technology Consultants to the World
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Farrukh Najmi [mailto:Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM] 
> Sent: Monday, December 20, 2004 11:49 AM
> To: regrep@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [regrep] Proposed changes to ebMS Binding and HTTP Binding
> 
> 
> Here is a breath of fresh air. I am for once proposing 
> reducing scope instead of increasing it for 3.0 specs :-)
> 
> 1. Based on implementation experience I think we should drop 
> the ebMS binding from the RS spec for the following reasons:
> 
> -It is out of date and underspecified. In its current form of 
> specificity and accuracy it is unimplementable.
> 
> -It would take major work to align it with ebMS 3.0 and 
> define template CPAs for registry and client
> 
> 2. Based on implementation experience I think we should drop 
> bindings for all registry protocol methods that require HTTP 
> POST from ebRS for the following reasons:
> 
> -Sending protocol messages over HTTP POST without SOAP is 
> pointless since we need to duplicate functionality of the 
> SOAP Header. This is very non-standard in other similar 
> specifications.
> 
> -SOAP Binding is already supporting any such protocol 
> messages over HTTP POST
> 
> -It is not good to have two similar but different ways of 
> implementing the same protocol
> 
> Note that one side effect of (2) is that we can now remove 
> the SignatureList element from RegistryRequestType and 
> RegistryResponseType since they were there to carry 
> signatures when there was no SOAP envelope (totally 
> non-standard practice).
> 
> I have discussed this with Matt who is an expert on both 
> issues and he supported my proposal.
> 
> Does any one have any objections to above proposals (1) and (2)?
> 
> --
> Regards,
> Farrukh
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from 
> the roster of the OASIS TC), go to 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/regrep/members/le
> ave_workgroup.php.
> 
>