Re: [ws-rx] i021 proposal

[Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>]

Paul,

Thanks for sending this out. Generally, it looks good to me.

One comment:

 > WS-PolicyAttachment [WS-PolicyAttachment] defines both abstract and
 > concrete attachment points in WSDL [WSDL1.1]. Because the RM policy
 > assertion specifies a concrete behavior, it MUST NOT be attached to
 > abstract constructs

Is that quite true or necessary?
'Abstract,' I assume means binding/endpoint independent. For example, 
the sept 2004 policy attachment spec says in section 4.1.2:
"Since the wsdl:portType may be used by more than one binding, it is 
RECOMMENDED that only policies containing abstract (i.e., binding 
independent) assertions should be attached to this type of element."

Now, if I want every binding/endpoint of a portType to support/require 
WSRM (say it is a banking application portType) would it not be 
reasonable to include the assertion in the portType?

Thanks.

-Anish
--

Paul Fremantle wrote:
> Proposal regarding issue 021. I'm not quite sure this is right yet, so I 
> would appreciate feedback from the Policy experts.
> 
> Based on CDII
> 
> Delete 142-154 section 2.3 and replace with.
> 
> 2.3 Assertion Attachment
> 
> The RM assertion can have Service, Endpoint, Operation or Message 
> Endpoint Policy Subjects [WS-PolicyAttachment].
> 
> WS-PolicyAttachment [WS-PolicyAttachment] defines both abstract and 
> concrete attachment points in WSDL [WSDL1.1]. Because the RM policy 
> assertion specifies a concrete behaviour, it MUST NOT be attached to 
> abstract constructs:
> 
>    * wsdl:portType
>    * wsdl:portType/wsdl:operation
>    * wsdl:portType/wsdl:operation/wsdl:input
>      • wsdl:portType/wsdl:operation/wsdl:output
>      • wsdl:portType/wsdl:operation/wsdl:fault
>    * wsdl:message
> 
> The RM policy assertion MAY be attached to the following constructs
> * wsdl:service
> * wsdl:port
> * wsdl:binding.
> • wsdl:binding/wsdl:operation
> • wsdl:binding/wsdl:operation/wsdl:input
> • wsdl:binding/wsdl:operation/wsdl:output
> • wsdl:binding/wsdl:operation/wsdl:fault
> 
> If the RM assertion is attached to the wsdl:service construct, it MUST 
> be considered to apply to all the wsdl:port's referenced in the binding.
> If the RM assertion is attached to the wsdl:port construct, it MUST be 
> considered to apply to all the wsdl:binding's referenced in the port.
> If the RM assertion is attached to the wsdl:binding construct, it MUST 
> be considered to apply to all the wsdl:operation's referenced in the 
> binding.
> If the RM assertion is attached to the wsdl:operation construct, it MUST 
> be considered to apply to all the wsdl:input's, wsdl:output's and 
> wsdl:fault's referenced in the operation.
> 
> WS-Addressing allows for policy assertions to be included within an
> EndpointReference. Per section 2.2 above, the presence of this
> policy assertion in an EPR specifies the level of support for
> WS-ReliableMessaging offered by that endpoint.
> 
> Paul
>