wsrf message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsrf] Singleton Resource Pattern
- From: "Sedukhin, Igor S" <Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com>
- To: "Rich Thompson" <richt2@us.ibm.com>,<wsrf@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 15:50:31 -0400
Why is X.509 certificate in a WS-Security header not a
sufficient means for referring to a proper "user" database record?
The property is shared, there is one service, and
there are multiple "records". Why can't I use WS-ResorceProperties spec to
access UserName property without having to deal with stateful/stateless
situation?
It
seems that ANYTHING in a message (body or a header) could be such
"stateID". There may be no reason to set in stone what that is. Leave it to the
implementers.
-- Igor
Sedukhin .. (igor.sedukhin@ca.com)
-- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza,
Islandia, NY 11788
But with the stateless character
of web services, that UserName property would be shared by all users of the web
service. There may be some usefulness to that, but it becomes far more useful
when the web service interface fronts access to a multiplicity of state, each
storing such a property.
To make
this a concrete example, presume the UserName property is really a reference to
a field in a database. One could provide a separate web service interface for
each record within the database, but it would be a much lighter (and frequently
more useful) definition if there was a single web service interface that had
some well defined means for indicating what record of the database was the
target of the current invocation. WSRP had this type of need and had to define a
means that is idiosyncratic to our protocol for passing the stateful reference.
Defining a standardized means by which infrastructure can take more of the load
for handling such references is one of the outcomes I would like to see from the
WSRF effort.
Rich Thompson
OASIS
WSRP TC Chair
"Sedukhin, Igor S"
<Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com>
07/12/2004 03:15 PM
|
To
| Rich
Thompson/Watson/IBM@IBMUS, <wsrf@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
| RE: [wsrf] Singleton
Resource Pattern |
|
Like I said, GetProperty would mean for example:...
Web
Service implements a UserName property. Client sends a GetResourceProperty SOAP
message with WS-Security headers containing X.509 certificate. Web Service
returns the UserName after matching the certificate.
-- Igor
Sedukhin .. (igor.sedukhin@ca.com)
--
(631)
342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza, Islandia, NY 11788
From: Rich Thompson [mailto:richt2@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2004 3:03 PM
To:
wsrf@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [wsrf] Singleton Resource
Pattern
What
would get/setProperty mean against the standard stateless character of the base
Web Services definition? Before these become useful, you need some manner of
modeling state. It seems to me the primary thrust behind defining WSRF is having
a standard definition of how to model such stateful web services and as someone
who has needed to idiosyncratically model state within the WSRP protocol, I see
a lot of value in that effort.
Rich Thompson
OASIS WSRP TC Chair
"Sedukhin, Igor S"
<Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com>
07/12/2004 02:55 PM
|
To
| Steve
Graham/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
|
cc
| <wsrf@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
Subject
| RE: [wsrf] Singleton
Resource Pattern |
|
Then what value
does the implied pattern add to the use case I have included?
Why does
resource pattern have to depend on WS-Addressing, EPRs and customizations of
those?
Why can't GetProperty/SetProperety be defined
independently?
-- Igor
Sedukhin .. (igor.sedukhin@ca.com)
--
(631)
342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza, Islandia, NY 11788
From: Steve Graham [mailto:sggraham@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2004 2:44 PM
To: Sedukhin, Igor
S
Cc: wsrf@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [wsrf]
Singleton Resource Pattern
>It seems that whether it is an "implied resource"
or an "implied singleton" has nothing to do with GetResourceProperty
(GetProperty for that sake) operation. In >other words use of WS-Addressing
does not add any semantic value to the fact that one could retrieve a property
by sending a message to a service.
Unfortunately, I disagree. The implied
resource pattern clarifies a certain pattern relating a web service and a
stateful resource. It is important that this pattern is clarified to allow a
single web service to act as the Web services message processor for a plurality
of stateful resources. Therefore the pattern of the message is formed to
disambiguate which of the potentially many stateful resources is associated with
the message is very important.
sgg
++++++++
Steve Graham
(919)254-0615 (T/L 444)
STSM, On
Demand Architecture
Member, IBM Academy of Technology
<Soli Deo
Gloria/>
++++++++
| "Sedukhin, Igor S"
<Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com>
07/12/2004 11:56 AM
|
To:
Steve Graham/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS,
<wsrf@lists.oasis-open.org> cc:
Subject: RE: [wsrf] Singleton
Resource Pattern |
Steve,
Your
example was interesting. How about this one:
Web Service implements a
UserName property. Client sends a GetResourceProperty SOAP message with
WS-Security headers containing X.509 certificate. Web Service returns the
UserName after matching the certificate.
-- Is this a singleton or an implied resource
pattern? One could claim that there is a user resource, however this interaction
does not use WS-Addressing and moreover it would not be possible to build WS-RF
qualified EPRs for such interaction.
The same use case could be modified to include
UserDiskQuota property, and the same argument would apply.
It seems that whether it is an
"implied resource" or an "implied singleton" has nothing to do with
GetResourceProperty (GetProperty for that sake) operation. In other words use of
WS-Addressing does not add any semantic value to the fact that one could
retrieve a property by sending a message to a service.
-- Igor
Sedukhin .. (igor.sedukhin@ca.com)
--
(631)
342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza, Islandia, NY 11788
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]