[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: PROPOSAL PR013 (also covers some of PR012)
What part of 12 does this cover and what else is needed for it? -----Original Message----- From: Paul Fremantle [mailto:paul@wso2.com] Sent: Friday, November 17, 2006 6:58 AM To: Doug Davis Cc: Marc Goodner; ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: PROPOSAL PR013 (also covers some of PR012) At the end of this text During creation of a Sequence the RM Source MAY specify the WS-Addressing anonymous IRI as the address of the AcksTo EPR for that Sequence. When the RM Source specifies the WS-Addressing anonymous IRI as the address of the AcksTo EPR, the RM Destination MUST Transmit any SequenceAcknowledgement headers for the created Sequence in a SOAP envelope to be Transmitted on the protocol binding-specific channel. Such a channel is provided by the context of a Received message containing a SOAP envelope that contains a Sequence header block and/or an AckRequested header block for that same Sequence identifier. Add: When the RM Destination receives an AckRequested header, and the ackTo EPR for that sequence is the WS-Addressing anonymous IRI, the RM Destination SHOULD respond on the protocol binding-specific channel provided by the Received message containing the AckRequested header block. Paul Doug Davis wrote: > > Does this text in the spec cover it: > > During creation of a Sequence the RM Source MAY specify the > WS-Addressing anonymous IRI as the > address of the AcksTo EPR for that Sequence. When the RM Source > specifies the WS-Addressing > anonymous IRI as the address of the AcksTo EPR, the RM Destination > MUST Transmit any > SequenceAcknowledgement headers for the created Sequence in a SOAP > envelope to be Transmitted > on the protocol binding-specific channel. Such a channel is provided > by the context of a Received > message containing a SOAP envelope that contains a Sequence header > block and/or an AckRequested > header block for that same Sequence identifier. > > thanks > -Doug > __________________________________________________ > STSM | Web Services Architect | IBM Software Group > (919) 254-6905 | IBM T/L 444-6906 | dug@us.ibm.com > > > > *Paul Fremantle <paul@wso2.com>* > > 11/16/2006 05:35 AM > > > To > Marc Goodner <mgoodner@microsoft.com> > cc > "ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org" <ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org> > Subject > Re: [ws-rx] PR Issue 13 SequenceAcknowledgement protocol response for > AcksTo = wsa:anonymous > > > > > > > > > > I'm not suggesting we define HTTP binding issues in our spec. I'm > pondering the following: > > In the case where there is an anonymous AcksTo and an AckRequested, the > RMD SHOULD respond with the SequenceAck on the backchannel of the > request that carried the AckReq. > > Paul > > Marc Goodner wrote: > > Paul, > > > > We can't describe HTTP binding issues in our spec, underlying > transports are simply out of scope. I don't have any issue with > recommending they forward this issue to a group like WS-I's RSP WG > where HTTP is in scope of their work. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Paul Fremantle [mailto:paul@wso2.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 12:08 AM > > To: Marc Goodner > > Cc: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org > > Subject: Re: [ws-rx] PR Issue 13 SequenceAcknowledgement protocol > response for AcksTo = wsa:anonymous > > > > Marc > > > > In the case of AckRequested over an anon HTTP connection, I believe the > > RMD should respond directly. After all it doesn't know when the next > > HTTP connection will come in to respond on. So I think they have a point > > and we should state this. > > > > Paul > > > > Marc Goodner wrote: > > > >> PR Issue 13, > >> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/pr/Issues.xml#i013 , asks if > >> an ack needs to be mapped to the original HTTP Response for the > >> message. It also suggests that maybe wsaAnonymous is not an allowed > >> value for acksTo and if so should be explicitly forbidden. > >> > >> I do not believe wsa:Anonymous should be barred from use in acksTo. I > >> think the spec is pretty clear that the only barred value is wsa:None. > >> > >> I don't think we can address the mapping of an ack in this case to the > >> HTTP layer as the underlying binding is out of our scope. In this case > >> I think the specification already allows flexibility to send an ack on > >> the HTTP response for the original request, or on a subsequent request > >> including using AckRequested. > >> > >> If everyone else agrees I suggest we provide that feedback and close > >> this issue with no action. > >> > >> > > > > -- > > Paul Fremantle > > VP/Technology and Partnerships, WSO2 > > OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair > > > > http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle > > paul@wso2.com > > (646) 290 8050 > > > > "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com > > > > > > > > > > -- > Paul Fremantle > VP/Technology and Partnerships, WSO2 > OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair > > http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle > paul@wso2.com > (646) 290 8050 > > "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com > > > > -- Paul Fremantle VP/Technology and Partnerships, WSO2 OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle paul@wso2.com (646) 290 8050 "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]