Re: [ws-rx] PR33 - Re: [ws-rx] NEW Issue back-channel not defined

[Richard Salz <rsalz@us.ibm.com>]

> I still don't agree that this is right. I think there may be cases where 

> there is a new transport level connection. The main point is that the 
> response channel is transport-defined not WS-A defined.

Hm.  For a SOAP-over-SMTP binding, would you expect the backchannel to be 
a response message, the equivalent of the recipient invoking the 'reply' 
function on its mail user-agent?  (I think the question is interesting; 
either there is no back-channel or there is only the back-channel.)  I 
think it's up to the particular transport binding to say, tho.

        /r$

--
STSM
Senior Security Architect
DataPower SOA Appliances