ws-rx message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: RE: [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: Scope of CS/Offer/Endpoint
- From: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
- To: "Gilbert Pilz" <gpilz@bea.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2007 16:21:13 -0500
Yup - its good we got more precise in
our words. This could be considered more of an editorial fix, but
being just a monkey I didn't want to presume anything :-0
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>
01/24/2007 04:16 PM
|
To
| Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, <ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
| RE: [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: Scope of CS/Offer/Endpoint |
|
While I don't specifically
disagree with the proposal, I note that the original term "WS-RM protocol
messages" did have a certain degree of ambiguity to it (which is one
of the reasons we revised our definitions). Some people thought that it
meant just Close, Terminate, AckReq, etc. Others thought that it meant
any message associated with the WS-RM protocol including those that we
now call Sequence Traffic Messages. The inclusion of Sequence Traffic Messages
in the definition of CS/Offer/Endpoint reflects this later definition .
. .
- gp
From: Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 12:57 PM
To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: Scope of CS/Offer/Endpoint
Title: Scope of CS/Offer/Endpoint
Description:
Current RM spec defines CS/Offer/Endpoint as:
/wsrm:CreateSequence/wsrm:Offer/wsrm:Endpoint
An RM Source MUST include this element, of type wsa:EndpointReferenceType
(as specified byWS-Addressing). This element specifies the endpoint reference
to which Sequence Lifecycle Messages,Sequence Traffic Messages, Acknowledgement
Requests, and fault messages related to the offeredSequence are to be sent.
Implementations MUST NOT use an endpoint reference in the Endpoint element
that would prevent the sending of Sequence Lifecycle Message, Sequence
Traffic Message, etc. For example, using the WS-Addressing "http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/none"
IRI would make it impossible for the RM Destination to ever send Sequence
Lifecycle Messages (e.g. TerminateSequence) to the RM Source for the Offered
Sequence. Implementations MAY use the WS-MakeConnection anonymous URI template
and doing so implies that messages will be retrieved using a mechanism
such as the MakeConnection message.
The inclusion of the "Sequence Traffic Messages" actually isn't
correct. Sequence Traffic Message (ie. app messages) go to other
EPRs, like wsa:ReplyTo - just like RM was even being used. CS/Offer/Endpoint
is supposed to be for RM protocol messages (Close, Terminate, AckReq...).
I think when we switched over to the new RM terms we got a bit too
excited :-) The old text used to say:
...This element specifies the endpoint reference to which WS-RM protocol
messages related to the offered Sequence are to be sent.
Proposal:
Remove "Sequence Traffic Message" from the current definition
of CS/Offer/Endpoint. It appears in 2 spots.
thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM | Web Services Architect | IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905 | IBM T/L 444-6905 | dug@us.ibm.com
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]