Re: [ws-rx] Clarification proposal for i090

[Daniel Millwood <MILLWOOD@uk.ibm.com>]

Anish,

The original reason for raising issue i090 was that in what I would
consider to be a typical use-case, an Application Source wants to send a
message to a target URI and in-order to do this, the RMS will associate the
target URI with a sequence, so that it knows the correct sequence to use.
If the RMS did not have a sequence associated with the target URI, it would
create a new one.

Forgetting offer a second, this same process would take place in both
directions for a request-response exchange.

Now when a sequence is offered, the responding RMS is given the offered
sequence but it has no target URI to associate it with, unless an
assumption is made such as associating the sequence with one of the EPRs
from the CreateSequence message, or assuming that the offered sequence
should be used for all replies to messages on the inbound sequence.

My concern is that unless offer is removed, or this relationship is
defined, different implementations will make different assumptions causing
interop problems.

Can you see a way in which offer can remain a general optimization, but
also be defined clearly enough to avoid interoperability problems?

Thanks,  Dan

WS-Reliable Messaging Architecture/Development
IBM WebSphere Messaging Design and Development
MP 211
Hursley
Tel. Internal 248617
Tel. External +44 1962 818617
Email. millwood@uk.ibm.com



                                                                           
             Anish Karmarkar                                               
             <Anish.Karmarkar@                                             
             oracle.com>                                                To 
                                       Marc Goodner                        
             23/02/2006 19:49          <mgoodner@microsoft.com>            
                                                                        cc 
                                       ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org          
                                                                   Subject 
                                       Re: [ws-rx] Clarification proposal  
                                       for i090                            
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           
                                                                           




Marc,

I've not followed the full discussion on this issue, but was curious as
to why is RMS/RMD restricted to a single EPR (replyTo). We have already
said that RMS/RMD can span multiple WSDL endpoints, EPRs.

This changes does not make it just an optimization anymore.

-Anish
--

Marc Goodner wrote:
> I believe that Offer provides important functionality and should not be
> cut to remove ambiguity with its usage. I would prefer to remove that
> ambiguity through clarifications to the spec rather than cut the
> feature. Below is my proposal for how to do so based on WD10.
>
>
>
> Clarification proposal for i090
>
>
>
> Section 2.1
>
> Line 240 after last sentence add, “When an offer is accepted all
> messages for the accepted sequence MUST be sent to the <wsa:ReplyTo> of
> the <wsrm:CreateSequence> message.”
>
>
>
> Line 274 change “to RM Source.” to “to the RM Source at the address
> specified by the <wsa:ReplyTo> of this message.”
>
>
>
> Line 343 change “to RM Source.” to “to the RM Source at the address
> specified by the <wsa:ReplyTo> of the <wsrm:CreateSequence> message.”
>
>
>
>
>
> Marc Goodner
>
> Technical Diplomat
>
> Microsoft Corporation
>
> Tel: (425) 703-1903
>
> Blog: http://spaces.msn.com/mrgoodner/
>
>
>