+1
--Stefan
From: Doug Davis
[mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2007 7:05 AM
To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] Concrete proposal for PR021
Sections 3.8 and 3.9: Additional statements of the pattern
"The RM [Source | Destination] MUST detect and process any [*] header
blocks that are piggy-backed on another message".
Is this really true? W/o a mU=1 the header can
be ignored. I understand the sentiment you're trying to get across (the
RMD needs to be prepared for piggy-backed headers) but I'm not really sure
there's anything normative we need to say anything about it beyond what SOAP
itself says. Technically, the sending endpoint could put any header it
wants in a message (not just piggy-backed RM headers) and those should be
treated no differently. They may or may not be processed - but if marked
with mU=1 then they must be processed. I think some non-normative text
might be more approrpriate - something along the lines of:
Since the choice of whether or not to
piggy-back RM headers is made by the endpoint sending the message, in order to
ensure optimal and successful processing of RM Sequences, endpoints that
receive RM-related messages should be prepared to process RM Headers that may
be included in any message it receives.
thanks
-Doug
__________________________________________________
STSM | Web Services Architect | IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905 | IBM T/L 444-6905 | dug@us.ibm.com
"Gilbert
Pilz" <gpilz@bea.com>
01/05/2007
07:45 PM
|
To
|
<ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
|
[ws-rx]
Concrete proposal for PR021
|
|
Attached
is the concrete proposal for point (2) of PR021. There are changes to sections
3.2, 3.8, and 3.9. Most of the changes are editorial; I put all the material
related to piggy-backing into a common paragraph. The substantive changes
consist of:
Section
3.2: Additional sentence concerning which party controls the use of
piggy-backing.
Sections
3.8 and 3.9: Additional statements of the pattern "The RM [Source |
Destination] MUST detect and process any [*] header blocks that are
piggy-backed on another message".
- gp
<<...>>
<<...>> [attachment "PR012-case2.pdf" deleted by Doug
Davis/Raleigh/IBM] [attachment "PR021-case2-changes.pdf" deleted by
Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM]