[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] Relationship of ISSUE 008 with ISSUE 021
Ashok Malhotra wrote: >Tom: >You can attach policies at the binding level. >This allows you to do what you want. > > To clarify, it seems that the message subject level of attachment can use binding scope: . wsdl:binding/wsdl:operation/wsdl:input . wsdl:binding/wsdl:operation/wsdl:output . wsdl:binding/wsdl:operation/wsdl:fault These are the things that attaching reliability DA levels and other QOS parameters might enable specification of two-way operation types which have different reliability requirements in each direction. Tom Rutt >But there are other problems. As I see it, the >binding (or message) definition is for the messages >in the sequence - not the framing messages such as >CreateSequence, CreateSequenceResponse, Ack, etc. >So if we attach a QoS policy to the binding, which >messages does it apply to? > >All the best, Ashok > > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Tom Rutt [mailto:tom@coastin.com] >>Sent: Thursday, September 29, 2005 8:23 AM >>To: wsrx >>Subject: [ws-rx] Relationship of ISSUE 008 with ISSUE 021 >> >>The Sept 2004 version of WS-policy attachment includes the following >>section: >>" >>4.1.4 Message Policy Subject The following WSDL/1.1 elements >>are used to describe messages: >>. wsdl:message >>. wsdl:portType/wsdl:operation/wsdl:input >>. wsdl:portType/wsdl:operation/wsdl:output >>. wsdl:portType/wsdl:operation/wsdl:fault >>. wsdl:binding/wsdl:operation/wsdl:input >>. wsdl:binding/wsdl:operation/wsdl:output >>. wsdl:binding/wsdl:operation/wsdl:fault >> >>The current WS-RM policy spec attaches policy at the endpoint >>subject level. >> >>If we could attach the Qos policy for DA at the message >>subject level, we would be in a better position to express >>the desired semantics for Reliability of a WSDL >>Request/response operation. >> >>For example, exactly once, ordered could be attached to the >>request message, while no reliability qos is attached to the response. >> >>Other examples could attache reliability DA levels to the >>response message as well. >> >>Thus I now see that Issue 008 on granularity of reliability >>policy attachment, and Issue 021 on reliability for two way >>exchanges should be discussed together. >> >>Tom Rutt >> >>-- >>---------------------------------------------------- >>Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com >>Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133 >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > -- ---------------------------------------------------- Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]