[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Proposed addition to a reliability binding
Per our discussion last conf call, proposed additions to WS-ReliableMessaging binding appendix (10.2):
- below the title (10.2):
"NOTE: This section is based on the Committee Draft 3 (February 06) of the WS-ReliableMessaging specification, which is not yet an OASIS standard at the time the present specification is written. For this reason, this section may not be accurate with regard to the final state of WS-ReliableMessaging. It should be understood as only providing some indication of how a binding can be achieved for it. In particular, this section points at some interoperability aspects that are not covered by the above release of WS-ReliableMessaging, and are left to be decided by the user community, or by a subsequent profiling of this specification."
- At the end of 10.2.1:
"Among the features that require further specification or profiling in order to enable MSH interoperability based on WS-ReliableMessaging, are:
(a) In case the reliability contract and parameters do not apply equally to all messages sent between two MSHs, the scope of application of a reliability contract SHOULD be the sequence. Because a reliability module is not required to associate reliability contracts with particular message profiles, the reliability QoS that applies to a sequence SHOULD be communicated via CreateSequence / CreateSequenceResponse extensibility points using a format that remains to be determined.
(b) In case of HTTP binding, an agreement or profiling on how the operations CreateSequence, CloseSequence and TerminateSequence, as well as their responses, are expected to bind to HTTP MEPs. Also part of this agreement or profiling, how sequence acknowledgements may bind to HTTP, and how they can be bundled with other messages, if applicable.