A point of clarification: Is this "(small) normative specification"
expected to be clearly delimited as such, or will it be folded into the
WSRF specifications? The concern, of course, is that we be able to say
things like "the subscription endpoint MUST conform to [whatever IRP
becomes]" without having to require anything about WSRP or
WSRL or any other WSR*.
At this point I don't have a strong opinion whether such a spec merits
its own doc, or whether "Section 42 of the XYZZY doc" is fine. I'm
more concerned that it be clearly delimited and self-contained.
Steve Graham wrote:
At the WSRF f2f, there was some
discussion
about IRP, whether a "singleton pattern was legal" whether non-WSA
approaches were legal.
WSRF commissioned a task force to
build
a (small) normative specification defining the IRP concept and
outlining
a set of possible embodiments of IRP in concrete technology. Using
WSAddressing with reference properties and using WSAddressing by
encoding
the resource disambiguator in the wsa:address will be two embodiments
we
will spell out. I suspect there may be other embodiments we outline.
The major work here is to tease apart the IRP "concept"
from any particular embodiment.
sgg
++++++++
Steve Graham
(919)254-0615 (T/L 444)
STSM, On Demand Architecture
Member, IBM Academy of Technology
<Soli Deo Gloria/>
++++++++
OK. It seems to me that for
whatever
it is, the semantics and mechanics of IRP are fairly clear. Could some
one now please explain for my benefit (and for those who are part of
WSN
only), what did we mean during the F2F by -- pending clarification
of IRP under WSRF. Just a description of the problem statement would do
for me.
Thanks,
Sanjay
-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Graham [mailto:sggraham@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Friday, Aug 06, 2004 5:12 AM
To: Patil, Sanjay
Cc: David Hull; 'Vambenepe, William N'; wsn@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [wsn] Multiple endpoints in IRP?
Hi Sanjay:
IRP does not require WS REsources of the same type to share a single
endpoint.
So, in your example, it is completely legal for the Subscriptions
created by an NP to have 3 or 4 or 20 or n different
SubscriptionManager
endpoints.
++++++++
Steve Graham
(919)254-0615 (T/L 444)
STSM, On Demand Architecture
Member, IBM Academy of Technology
<Soli Deo Gloria/>
++++++++
I have a related question here --
Does the IRP require that multiple WS Resources of the same type share
a single endpoint? For example, is it required that the EPRs for all
the
Subscriptions created by a NotificationProducer have the same endpoint
address. Or would it simply be considered as a common practice (isn't
that
really a pattern)?
Thanks,
Sanjay
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vambenepe, William N [mailto:vbp@hp.com]
> Sent: Thursday, Aug 05, 2004 2:59 PM
> To: Steve Graham; David Hull
> Cc: wsn@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [wsn] Multiple endpoints in IRP?
>
>
> (with my TC member hat on, not my chair hat)
>
> The statement you pointed out is really just a reinforcement of the
> rules of the IRP. And, as Steve says, it doesn't imply any
> capability to
> address WS-Resources as groups. Or did I misunderstand your
question
> David?
>
> William
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Steve Graham [mailto:sggraham@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 05, 2004 1:43 PM
> To: David Hull
> Cc: wsn@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [wsn] Multiple endpoints in IRP?
>
>
>
> hi David:
> I would think that one of our WSDM colleagues could comment
further.
> But from my read of the statement you quoted from WSDM MUWS, it was
> simply observing that a manageability endpoint (eg a Web service
> endpoint) may be the front end for multiple resources. Therefore
the
> IRP must be used to identify any single one of those resources. I
> didn't get the read that there was any capability implied to
access
a
> group of more than one resource with a single EPR. This is
> not possible
> from what I understand of WS-Addressing.
>
> sgg
>
> ++++++++
> Steve Graham
> (919)254-0615 (T/L 444)
> STSM, On Demand Architecture
> Member, IBM Academy of Technology
> <Soli Deo Gloria/>
> ++++++++
>
>
>
>
> David
Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
>
> 08/05/2004 04:14 PM
>
>
> To: wsn@lists.oasis-open.org
> cc:
> Subject: [wsn]
Multiple endpoints in IRP?
>
>
>
> While reading through WSDM MUWS, I ran across this interesting
> statement:
>
> "If the manageability endpoint corresponds to a variable
> number (zero or
>
> more) of manageable resources, then the WSRF Implied Resource
Pattern
> MUST be followed. This means that the element(s) listed in the
> ReferenceProperties of a WS-Resource qualified EPR must be
> included in
> the header of messages sent to such manageability endpoints."
>
> This seems to imply a WS-Address with multiple ReferenceProperties
> elements, one for each EPR.
>
> Does the IRP allow for multiple resources to be addressed as
> a group?
> Does this have to be done via repeated ReferenceProperties
> elements, or
> could one give a predicate instead, or bake something magic into
the
> Address URI?
>
> I realize that the IRP is in a fluid state at the moment, but I'd
be
> interested to know current thinking. Is this the sort of
> issue the WSRP
>
> subgroup is trying to address?
>
>
>
|