RE: [ws-rx] POSSIBLE NEW ISSUE: WS-RX policies not manifested on the wire

["Marc Goodner" <mgoodner@microsoft.com>]

Ashok, please use the template the TC has agreed to use in raising new
issues: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-rx/200507/msg00080.html 

Clearly identifying the issue in this format is important so that I can
log it correctly as well as recognize that someone is raising an issue
rather than starting discussion of a possible new issue.

Please also see this mail regarding tagging logged issues in thread
discussions:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-rx/200507/msg00235.html 

-----Original Message-----
From: Ashok Malhotra [mailto:ashok.malhotra@oracle.com] 
Sent: Friday, July 29, 2005 3:33 PM
To: Marc Goodner
Cc: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: FW: [ws-rx] POSSIBLE NEW ISSUE: WS-RX policies not manifested
on the wire

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
>  
> 
>