RE: [ws-rx] discussion of issue i009

[Ashok Malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com>]

Right!  But we need to work out which policy assertions go with which messages.
I'm not sure that the proposed assertion shd be a child element
of the existing RM assertion as I think they belong in different messages.
But this is work we need to do.

All the best, Ashok
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Christopher B Ferris [mailto:chrisfer@us.ibm.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2005 6:12 AM
> To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [ws-rx] discussion of issue i009
> 
> Ashok,
> 
> I haven't suggested an association with a message at all. My 
> proposal just augments the RMssertion with a child element: 
> <wsrm:DeliveryAssurance/>. The current RM Policy Assertion 
> spec defines scope of the assertion to have Endpoint Policy 
> Subject as per WS-Policy Attachments. 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Christopher Ferris
> STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
> email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
> blog: http://webpages.charter.net/chrisfer/blog.html
> phone: +1 508 377 9295
> 
> Ashok Malhotra <ashok.malhotra@oracle.com> wrote on 
> 09/15/2005 08:59:52
> AM:
> 
> > Chris:
> > As with issue i024, we need to determine the messages to which this 
> > new assertion applies.  It seems from your discussion that 
> it applies 
> > only to the CreateSequenceResponse.  Does this makes sense or are 
> > there other usecases?
> > 
> > All the best, Ashok
> > 
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Christopher B Ferris [mailto:chrisfer@us.ibm.com]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, September 14, 2005 9:40 AM
> > > To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> > > Subject: [ws-rx] discussion of issue i009
> > > 
> > > All,
> > > 
> > > This email is intended to start a discussion on issue i009 [1].
> > > 
> > > The issue has to do with providing the RMD with the capacity to 
> > > advertise its DA QoS. It is somewhat related to issue 
> i024, raised 
> > > by Ashok. However, I don't believe that the resolutions 
> need to be 
> > > tied to one another.
> > > 
> > > Basically, there is currently no specified means of 
> declaring the DA 
> > > applied at a given RMD endpoint. It has been suggested 
> that the RMS 
> > > (or AS) might have a vested interest in knowing, a priori to 
> > > establishing a Sequence with an RMD what DA would be applied. For 
> > > instance, it may require that the messages be processed 
> InOrder. If 
> > > the RMD were not enforcing InOrder DA at the RMD, then the source 
> > > endpoint might choose not to engage with that endpoint.
> > > 
> > > I would propose that one way to resolve this would be to 
> define RM 
> > > policy assertions that specify the DA.
> > > e.g. a psuedo-schema for this would be as follows:
> > > 
> > > <wsrm:RMAssertion>
> > >   <wsrm:DeliveryAssertion 
> mode="[AtLeastOnce|AtMostOnce|ExactlyOnce]"
> > > ordered="[xs:boolean]"? ... >
> > >     ...
> > >   </wsrm:DeliveryAssertion>?
> > >   ...
> > > </wsrm:RMAssertion>
> > > 
> > > Thus, an endpoint could declare its DA QoS in the policy 
> statement 
> > > associated with the endpoint.
> > > 
> > > Thoughts?
> > > 
> > > [1]
> > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.ph
> > > p/14329/ReliableMessagingIssues.xml#i009
> > > 
> > > Cheers,
> > > 
> > > Christopher Ferris
> > > STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
> > > email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
> > > blog: http://webpages.charter.net/chrisfer/blog.html
> > > phone: +1 508 377 9295
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> 
> 
>