RE: [ws-rx] [i089] comments on joint proposal

["Gilbert Pilz" <Gilbert.Pilz@bea.com>]

One comment inline

---

From: Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 5:14 AM
To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] [i089] comments on joint proposal

"Durand, Jacques R." <JDurand@us.fujitsu.com> wrote on 06/08/2006 04:01:48 AM:
> Some feedback – sorry for not sending this earlier.
> These should be interpreted as mere requests for clarification in
> case I missed something…;-)  

 

[stuff removed]

 
> 3- Now with an in-out exchange with (rel in / non-rel out), the out
> message is not mediated by any RMD-client. How would this out
> message be delivered to its endpoint, in case the "in" message was
> resent by RMS-client? It probably should contain explicit endpoint
> info (wsa:To?) but then how does the server know when to add this,
> while it would not have to if the in message originated from the
> sending endpoint vs. the RMS-client?
> Are we saying that the anon URI template should be understood
> outside RM components? (doesn't that fall under wsa scope, and
> beyond wsrm scope?)

Not sure I followed this but let me try...
In the rel-in/non-rel-out case, if the RMS-client resends the
rel-in message then I would suspect that all but one of those
attempts would get back a 202 since all but one are dups.
In the one non-202 case if the replyTo was anon then it would
carry the response.  

 

But doesn't this assume that the "duplicate elimination" delivery assurance is in effect between the RMD and the AD? Can we really assume this? Can we assume that the RMS is aware of this?

 [stuff removed]