Re: FW: [ws-rx] POSSIBLE NEW ISSUE: WS-RX policies not manifested onthe wire

[Duane Nickull <dnickull@adobe.com>]

Ashok:

For what it is worth, I noted this as a potential issue for interop 
testing.  If your assumptions are correct, figuring out how declared QoS 
properties for a given sequence constrain the actors is something to at 
least discuss as per your email.

Cheers!

Duane

Ashok Malhotra wrote:

>Please send issue template.
>
>I'm must say that I'm a bit ticked that a note that has
>POSSIBLE NEW ISSUE in the heading gets completely ignored.
>
>All the best, Ashok
> 
>
>  
>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Ashok Malhotra [mailto:ashok.malhotra@oracle.com] 
>>Sent: Monday, July 25, 2005 2:01 PM
>>To: wsrx
>>Subject: [ws-rx] POSSIBLE NEW ISSUE: WS-RX policies not 
>>manifested on the wire
>>
>>Issue 9 asks whether WS-RX should define policy assertions to 
>>define various kinds of QoS properties for a message 
>>sequence.  This certainly seems like a good subject for 
>>discussion and I don't mean to prejudge how the WG will 
>>decide this.  What worries is something related.
>>
>>There is a tacit assumption that WS-RX policies will follow 
>>WS-Policy (latest public version Sept. 2004).  This 
>>specification does not state explicitly how to tell whether a 
>>message conforms to a particular policy.
>>The assumption is that one can examine the headers in the 
>>message and tell what policy is being followed.  Thus, the 
>>effect of policies is manifested on the wire.
>>
>>But neither the suggested QoS assertions nor the existing 
>>WS-RX assertion declares the retry-interval etc. will appear 
>>as message headers.  So, how do we tell what policy is being 
>>followed?  Clearly, some other mechanism is needed.  One way 
>>is for messages to carry the URI of the policy they adhere 
>>to.  Another is to define headers in the start-sequence and 
>>sequence-started messages that indicate policy information.  
>>I'm sure folks can come up with other good suggestions.
>>
>>All the best, Ashok
>> 
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>  
>