ws-rx message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: Where is a SequenceAcknowledgement sent on receiptof a AckRequested header?
- From: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
- To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
- Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 17:46:16 -0500
Anish,
If you could write up some replacement
text for those offending "returned/response" words I think you're
change would be ok. Tweaking the existing text instead of adding
more text would be best.
thanks,
-Doug
Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
01/26/2006 04:10 PM
|
To
| Christopher B Ferris/Waltham/IBM@IBMUS
|
cc
| wsrx <ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
Subject
| Re: [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: Where
is a SequenceAcknowledgement sent on receipt of a AckRequested header? |
|
Yes, I did see that statement, but is was not clear
to me that it
applied to every SeqAck header that is sent by the RMD. There are three
cases when SeqAcks are sent:
1) when the RMD decides to send it unilaterally.
2) when the RMD decides to send it on receipt of a AckRequested header
3) when the RMD receives a CloseSequence message and sends a
CloseSequenceResponse message along with the SeqAck header.
In the 3rd case, it is required that the SeqAck header go back to the
replyTo address (along with the CloseSequenceResponse message). In the
1st case, it is clear that the SeqAck is sent to AcksTo EPR. The 2nd
case is ambiguous to me.
The spec in section 3.5 says:
"The purpose of the <wsrm:AckRequested> header block is to signal
to the
RM Destination that the RM Source is requesting that a
<wsrm:SequenceAcknowledgement> be ****returned****.
The RM Source may request an acknowledgement message from the RM
Destination at any time by including an <wsrm:AckRequested> header
block
in the message. An RM Destination that receives a message that contains
an <wsrm:AckRequested> header block MUST ****respond**** with a message
containing a <wsrm:SequenceAcknowledgement> header block."
It wasn't clear to me that the stmt that you point out applied in the
2nd case. Perhaps it was just me. If so, obviously it isn't an issue.
> Making such a statement redundantly elsewhere
> in the spec seems unnecessary, IMO.
We don't have to make a redundant statement elsewhere. We can modify the
existing statement (that you pointed out) in place to make this clear.
-Anish
--
Christopher B Ferris wrote:
>
> CDII draft states on line 258:
>
> /wsrm:CreateSequence/wsrm:AcksTo
> This REQUIRED element, of type wsa:EndpointReferenceType as specified
by
> WS-Addressing [WSAddressing]
> specifies the endpoint reference to which <wsrm:SequenceAcknowledgement>
> messages
> and faults related to the created Sequence are to be sent.
>
> I see no ambiguity here. Making such a statement redundantly elsewhere
> in the spec seems unnecessary, IMO.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Christopher Ferris
> STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
> email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
> blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/dw_blog.jspa?blog=440
> phone: +1 508 377 9295
>
> Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com> wrote on 01/26/2006
> 02:54:27 PM:
>
> > Title: Where is the SequenceAcknowledgement sent on receipt
of
> > AckRequested header?
> > Description: The spec does not say where the SequenceAcknowledgement
> > message is sent on receipt of the AckRequested header.
There are two
> > possibilities: to the AcksTo EPR or to the ReplyTo (as
a response) of
> > the message requesting the SequenceAcknowledgement.
> > Target: core
> >
> > -Anish
> > --
> >
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]