RE: [wsrf] ISSUE: Should resource lifetime require WS-Resource.

["Sedukhin, Igor S" <Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com>]

The WS-Resource is destroyed. That is, don't send nothing to its EPR no more -- there is nobody there. I think that this is more obvious semantics than destruction of a "stateful resource component of the WS-Resource" which, by the way, has never been normatively defined anywhere else.

 

-- Igor Sedukhin .. (igor.sedukhin@ca.com)
-- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza, Islandia, NY 11749

 

---

From: Steve Graham [mailto:sggraham@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, November 01, 2004 8:37 AM
To: meder@mcs.anl.gov
Cc: wsrf-oasis
Subject: Re: [wsrf] ISSUE: Should resource lifetime require WS-Resource.

Sam: 
This is a good question. 

Now, what is the semantic of Destroy() if no WS-Resource 
is assumed.  Currently, the text from WSRF-RL version 1.2 draft 03 
reads: 

224 If the WS-Resource 
accepts the Destroy request message, upon receipt of this message the WS- 
225 Resource MUST either (1) destroy the 
implied stateful resource component of the WS-Resource 
226 and return the following DestroyResponse message to 
acknowledge successful destruction, or 
227 (2) return a fault message indicating failure. Note that the 
destruction of the stateful resource 
228 
component of the WS-Resource effectively destroys the WS-Resource. 

So, if we allow the case where the Destroy 
is sent to something other than a WS-Resource, what is the semantic?  Ie 
what can the requestor imagine is destroyed in successful response to the 
request? 

sgg
++++++++
Steve 
Graham
(919)254-0615 (T/L 444)
STSM, On Demand Architecture
Member, IBM 
Academy of Technology
<Soli Deo 
Gloria/>
++++++++

Samuel Meder <meder@mcs.anl.gov>

10/29/2004 09:41 PM

Please respond to
meder

To	wsrf-oasis <wsrf@lists.oasis-open.org>
cc
Subject	[wsrf] ISSUE: Should resource lifetime require WS-Resource.

Specifically should the destroy operation require that the Web 
Service
implementing it is also a 
WS-Resource.

/Sam