RE: RE: [ws-rx] PR issue 1 - WS-Addressing comment on ws-rm related to useof extended anonymous uri

[Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>]

Yes, to a certain extent the URI is
opaque but only up to a point.  Obviously at some point it needs to
be examined to know where to open a connection to - or in the case of a
special URI (like none or anon) to do something else.  The scope of
the meaning of the URI in the 'special' case is up to the definer of that
URI.  Whether its a trivial meaning (e.g. none=trash it), or whether
its more complex (e.g. WS-Discovery defines one that means send a multi-cast
over a list of channels) makes no difference as long as the soap stack
knows what to do with it.
thanks,
-Doug

Marc Goodner <mgoodner@microsoft.com>

09/26/2006 08:55 PM

To	Gilbert Pilz <Gilbert.Pilz@bea.com>, Paul Fremantle <paul@wso2.com>, Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
cc	"ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org" <ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject	RE: RE: [ws-rx] PR issue 1 - WS-Addressing comment on ws-rm related to use of extended anonymous uri

These are some interesting points, but don't they
apply equally to the URI as well? Shouldn't the URI be treated as no less
opaque? As it is the server has to recognize and deconstruct the URI in
order to understand that not only is the client identifying a new queue
to poll for messages but also the backchannel required to send those messages
on. Doesn't that mean that the RM anon URI identifies two resources rather
than one? Is that legal?

-----Original Message-----
From: Gilbert Pilz [mailto:Gilbert.Pilz@bea.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 2:37 PM
To: Paul Fremantle; Doug Davis
Cc: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [ws-rx] PR issue 1 - WS-Addressing comment on ws-rm related
to use of extended anonymous uri

The origins of this go back to a struggle in WS-Addressing between "reference
parameters" and "reference properties". Reference parameters
are supposed to be opaque to everyone except the minter of the EPR. The
proto-usecase is a service consumer disambiguating callback operations
by placing unique parameters in its ReplyTo EPRs. Using reference parameters
to communicate identity information from the service consumer to the service
provider (which is what this idea entails) basically turns them into "reference
properties". The problem with reference properties is that there is
*no* such thing (the WS-Addressing WG said so).

It's ironic that the WS-Addressing WG first said "there is no such
thing as reference properties" then turns around and says "maybe
you should solve this problem using reference properties".

- gp

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Fremantle [mailto:paul@wso2.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2006 9:32 AM
> To: Doug Davis
> Cc: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [ws-rx] PR issue 1 - WS-Addressing comment on ws-rm
> related to use of extended anonymous uri
>
> Doug
>
> > - rather than looking at the bigger issue of how a new URI
> defined by
> > some specification can compose with WSA's wsaw:Anonymous
> URI, the WSA
> > WG kept wanting to reexamine whether or not RM's solution was
the
> > right choice.  For example, could WSA's anon+ref-p's be
> used instead.
> Didn't we discuss this option (anon+refps)? Can you remind me why
we
> didn't go for it?
>
> Paul
>
>
>