[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [ws-rx] Minimalist GetMessage proposal: the anon use case
- The case reliable-in/reliable-out works quite well, provided the RMS does the correlation between initial sequence and offered seq, as recommended in 4.2. - The case unreliable-in/reliable-out seems to need the "hint" you mention in 4.2., plus some other way to offer a sequence than the CS carrier. In any case, the many-anonymous(RMD)clients- to-one-(RMS)server appears to be quite a common case (many users of the same WS instance), to justify adding back 4.2 in your proposal... Jacques -----Original Message----- From: Paul Fremantle [mailto:paul@wso2.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 11:15 PM To: Durand, Jacques R. Cc: wsrx Subject: Re: [ws-rx] Minimalist GetMessage proposal: the anon use case Jacques You are quite right. This is an interesting situation. One of the problems is that we do not in this spec define how messages are allocated to sequences. The IBM proposal simply shifts this problem to the EPRId as you point out. In one of my own early drafts of the proposal I had these words in section 4.2, but I removed them for simplicity. However, if they are useful they could be added back. "The WSRM specification does not define the allocation of messages to a sequence. In the case of reliable request-response with an anonymous client, the server MAY make a correlation between an incoming sequence and an offered sequence. In the case where the request message is unreliable, and the client is anonymous, there might not be a clear basis to allocate messages to a given sequence. In this scenario the client MAY add the <wsrm:Identifier> of the offered sequence as a SOAP Header element or elsewhere in the message as a hint to the server." Paul Durand, Jacques R. wrote: > Paul: > > Are you sure this works when two different (un-addressable) clients are > sending an anonymous wsrm:Offer/wsrm:Endpoint to the same RMS-to-be > endpoint, say for offering sequences S1 and S2? > The offered sequences S1 and S2 have to be clearly associated from the > start with the right client-RMD, by the server-RMS. > With an in/out pattern where the in message is not sent reliably, how > would the server-RMS know if it should use S1 or S2 when sending the out > message for an in message of one of the two initiators? > Don't we still face the same issue of distinguishing anonymous endpoints > that IBM proposal tries to address ( with wsrm:EPRid) ? > (Do I miss something?) > > Jacques > > -----Original Message----- > From: Paul Fremantle [mailto:paul@wso2.com] > Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 12:05 PM > To: wsrx > Subject: [ws-rx] Minimalist GetMessage proposal > > Based on some of the discussions it seemed to me that it could be > valuable to produce a completely "minimalist" GetMessage proposal. > > This is a new proposal that is based on the previous WSO2 proposal. > > The proposal removes the MessageID selector in the GetMessage - relying > on simply getting whatever message the server sends back next. > > Also it removes the section 4.2. Effectively section 4.2 is an > optimisation: for example to support unreliable-in/reliable-out a client > > could do a createsequence+offer and never use the outgoing sequence. In > this case there is an overhead, which 4.2 aimed to remove, but this > simplifies the proposal by focussing on the bare minimum required to > support the most common use cases, but still allowing the other use case > > with a slight overhead. > > I've also included a sample message flow which I hope helps understand > the proposal and show the general usage. > > Paul > > -- Paul Fremantle VP/Technology, WSO2 and OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair http://feeds.feedburner.com/bloglines/pzf paul@wso2.com "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]