Proposed resolution for issue BINDINGS-97

[Simon Holdsworth <simon_holdsworth@uk.ibm.com>]

My proposal to resolve this issue is
as follows:

The raiser is correct in stating that
section 6.2 does not say how the correlation Id is set in request messages.
 We don't need to specify anything particular about the correlation
Id for this case. We should just remove the reference to correlation ID
from BJM60017:

For an SCA service with a JMS binding,
when a callback request message is sent the SCA runtime MUST set the JMSReplyTo
destination in the callback request message as defined in sections 6.1
or 6.2 as appropriate for the type of the callback operation invoked [BJM60017].


The only remaining concern is whether
there is any relationship between the original forward request correlation
and any callback correlation.  We could consider adding a statement
to section 6.4.2 to this effect, however if we decided to add conversation
support back in, this statement could then be incorrect, so my preference
is just to stick to defining the required behaviour as per the current
and modified normative statements. 

In terms of the response to the public
review comment, I would propose we respond as follows:

"You are correct that the reference
to correlation Id in statement BJM60017 is confusing.  There is no
relationship defined by the JMS binding specification between the correlation
Id used for forward messages and those used for callback messages.  We
have removed the reference to correlation Id from BJM60017."

Regards, Simon

Simon Holdsworth
STSM, SCA Bindings Architect; Master Inventor; OASIS SCA Bindings TC Chair
MP 211, IBM UK Labs, Hursley Park, Winchester SO21 2JN, UK
Tel +44-1962-815059 (Internal 245059) Fax +44-1962-816898
Internet - Simon_Holdsworth@uk.ibm.com

---

Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU