Re: [ws-rx] Presence of an wsa:relatesTo part within an acknowledgementmessage

[Chamikara Jayalath <chamikara@wso2.com>]

Hi,

RelatesTo does not always mean that the second message is an reply,
right ? (depending on the relationshipType).

Currently the spec does not specifically say that the ack message will
not have an relatesTo value. Could some implementation choose to mention
that. (this may cause implementations that does dispatching based on the
relatesTo header to function incorrectly) (I'm talking abt acks that are
sent as seperate messages, without being piggybacked).

Thanks,
Chamikara



Doug Davis wrote:

>
> Acks are not replies and therefore the presence, or absence, of a
> wsa:relatesTo in a message
> is not influences by it at all.  When an AckRequested is sent there is
> no guarantee that an Ack will
> be sent back on any kind of response flow - it just asks the RMD to
> send an Ack - it doesn't say
> anything about when or where that ack goes.  The Ack will be sent to
> the AcksTo EPR which
> may be totally different from the replyTo EPR that carried the
> AckRequested.  In cases where
> the Ack is not piggy-backed on another message, the Ack message is
> just a new one-way message.
> Does that help?
> thanks,
> -Doug
>
>
>
> *Chamikara Jayalath <chamikara@wso2.com>*
>
> 02/08/2006 12:09 PM
> Please respond to
> chamikara
>
>
> 	
> To
> 	ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> cc
> 	
> Subject
> 	[ws-rx] Presence of an wsa:relatesTo part within an acknowledgement
> message
>
>
>
> 	
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi All,
>
> I have a question regarding the relationship between an sequence
> acknowledgement message and the corresponding request message. I think I
> missed a part of the discussion that happened through this list. Pardon
> me if this issue was discussed previously.
>
> The problem is weather an wsa:RelatesTo tag should be present in an
> acknowledgement message. The presence of an wsa:RelatesTo part will make
> implementation issues such as dispatching easy. I.e. an web service
> framework will be able to identify the relationship between an ack
> message and the original application message that asked for this and it
> will be able to easily relate them (without going to the RM level).
>
> But to my knowledge,having a wsa:relatesTo value without the
> wsa:relationshipType attribute imply that the second message is an
> 'reply'. But an acknowledment is not an application level reply to the
> original message and it might be better to have an different value for
> the wsa:relationshipType attribute.
>
> On the other hand somebody could argue that the wsa:relatesTo header
> should not be present in an ack message since it is an RM control
> message and since it may have no direct connection with the original
> application message (even though it trigured the RM destination to send
> this ack).
>
> What should be the convention ?
>
> Thank you,
> Chamikara
>