[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Interop Test question: Metadata 2.0 EndpointType question
We have a small difference of opinion I'd like to resolve. The EndpointType (starting line 225 of Metadata spec) provides an optional ResponseLocation: The ResponseLocation attribute is used to enable different endpoints to be specified for receiving request and response messages associated with a protocol or profile, not as a means of load-balancing or redundancy (multiple elements of this type can be included for this purpose). When a role contains an element of this type pertaining to a protocol or profile for which only a single type of message (request or response) is applicable, then the ResponseLocation attribute is unused. We have one implementation ("A") that is omitting the ResponseLocation from its metadata specification for HTTP-Redirect SLO because the Location endpoint can handle both the request and response. Another implementation ("B") interprets the text above to mean that the ResponseLocation should only be omitted for the SOAP binding, and is requiring that the ResponseLocation be specified in metadata for other bindings. I tend to agree with "A", but wondered if anyone (besides "B") sees a potential for confusion in the usage of EndpointType. ET -- ____________________________________________________ Eric Tiffany | eric@projectliberty.org Interop Tech Lead | +1 413-458-3743 Liberty Alliance | +1 413-627-1778 mobile
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]