OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsrm message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [wsrm] Action item for ReplyTo definition


Jun Tatemura wrote:

>I think we need to discuss how Fault should be sent back (Fault Binding Patterns (FBPs)?) before
>designing ReplyTo details.
>
I am not sure if there is a requirement to ever need a callback fault 
binding pattern for any reliable message request other than those 
requesting the callback ack binding pattern.

Tom Rutt

>We have defined Ack Binding Patterns (ABP) (Response,Callback,Polling).
>If ack is requested, we can assume ABP = FBP.
>So, what if ack is not requested? Should we specify FBP (Response, Callback, Polling)?
>What about relationship between bindings of application fault messages (MEP?) and
>ws-rm fault messages (FBP)?
>
>Junichi Tatemura
>
>----- Original Message ----- 
>From: "Tom Rutt" <tom@coastin.com>
>To: "Patrick Yee" <kcyee@cecid.hku.hk>
>Cc: "wsrm" <wsrm@lists.oasis-open.org>
>Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2003 10:36 AM
>Subject: Re: [wsrm] Action item for ReplyTo definition
>
>
>  
>
>>Patrick Yee wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Another thinking.
>>>I understand the motivation to put ReplyTo under AckRequested. But 
>>>ReplyTo is not limited to acknowledgment as stated. It will be the 
>>>endpoint for sending fault messages as well. Where should I locate the 
>>>ReplyTo URL for sending fault messages if AckRequested is not used? 
>>>      
>>>
>>Good point. Reply to could be used for other things, in general.
>>
>>However, if ack is not requested in a callback pattern manner, why is 
>>the fault not just
>>sent in the HTTP response?  When will a request using the request or 
>>polling ack patern
>>need to send a fault in a callback?
>>
>>Tom Rutt
>>
>>    
>>
>>>Regards, -Patrick
>>>
>>>
>>>Tom Rutt wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>This mail is my contribution for fixing the definition for ReplyTo 
>>>>element. I also made necessary
>>>>changes to the ackRequested element to get rid of the words 
>>>>"asynchronous" and "synchronous".
>>>>
>>>>--------------------
>>>>
>>>>The current text states:
>>>>
>>>>“
>>>>
>>>>*3.2.2. ReplyTo Element*
>>>>
>>>>This is a REQUIRED element, used to specify the initial sender’s 
>>>>endpoint to receive an
>>>>
>>>>asynchronous Acknowledgment message or Fault Message. The value of 
>>>>this element is
>>>>
>>>>REQUIRED to be URL as defined in [RFC 1738].
>>>>
>>>>“
>>>>
>>>>However this does not properly reflect the differences between use of 
>>>>the reply
>>>>
>>>>acknowledgment binding pattern and the callback acknowledgement pattern.
>>>>
>>>>Lets first modify the definition for the AckRequested element to 
>>>>change the use of the
>>>>
>>>>terms synchronous and asynchronous to the new terms “reply 
>>>>acknowledgment pattern”
>>>>
>>>>and “callback acknowledgement pattern”.
>>>>
>>>>“*3.2.4. AckRequested Element*
>>>>
>>>>The AckRequested element is an OPTIONAL element. It is REQUIRED for
>>>>
>>>>guaranteeing message delivery and message order. However this element 
>>>>MUST NOT
>>>>
>>>>appear in a non-Reliable Message. This element is to be used for a 
>>>>sender to request the
>>>>
>>>>receiver to send back an Acknowledgment message for the message sent. 
>>>>The
>>>>
>>>>AckRequested element contains the following attribute:
>>>>
>>>>- an *ackPattern *attribute
>>>>
>>>>*(1) ackPattern attribute*
>>>>
>>>>The ackPattern attribute is an OPTIONAL attribute. This attribute is 
>>>>used to specify
>>>>
>>>>whether the Acknowledgment Message should be sent back directly in 
>>>>the reply to the reliable message or
>>>>
>>>>in a separate callback request. This attribute, when used, MUST have 
>>>>one of the following two values.
>>>>
>>>>The default value of this attribute is “Reply”, when omitted.
>>>>
>>>>- *Reply *: An Acknowledgment Message MUST be sent back directly in 
>>>>the Reply to the Reliable Message.
>>>>
>>>>- *Callback*: An Acknowledgment Message MUST be sent as a callback 
>>>>request, using the address in the
>>>>
>>>>ReplyTo element
>>>>
>>>>“
>>>>
>>>>With this modification the ReplyTo definition can be modified as 
>>>>follows:
>>>>
>>>>“
>>>>
>>>>*3.2.2. ReplyTo Element*
>>>>
>>>>This is an OPTIONAL element, used to specify the initial sender’s 
>>>>endpoint to receive a callback
>>>>
>>>>Acknowledgment message or Fault Message. A value of this element MUST 
>>>>be present in the request
>>>>
>>>>message if the AckRequested element indicates that the Callback 
>>>>Acknowledgement pattern is requested.
>>>>
>>>>If present, the ReplyTo element is required to be URL as defined in 
>>>>[RFC 1738].
>>>>
>>>>“
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting 
>>>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php 
>>>
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>-- 
>>----------------------------------------------------
>>Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@fsw.fujitsu.com
>>Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>
>  
>


-- 
----------------------------------------------------
Tom Rutt		email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@fsw.fujitsu.com
Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133






[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]