Issue about transparent multihop for "Bridged Domains"

["Jacques R. Durand" <JDurand@us.fujitsu.com>]

 

Issue: the assumption that "transparent multihop" applies to bridged domains (in the same way as it applies to Hub-and-spoke and Interconnected-Hubs topologies) is overly restrictive:

- In many applications, a B2B Gateway is where security and reliability are expected to be handled, as what is beyond the gateway is a private domain with QoS needs (and contractual needs) different from the public side.

 

Proposal:

- Make the principle of "transparent multihop" just one mode of multihop supported by ebMS part 2.

In another mode - "serviceable multihop" , intermediaries (typically edge-intermediaries) could modify the SOAP envelope before forwarding - add/remove security or reliability headers, even bundle/unbundle. In both modes, intermediaries never modify User Message units or Signal Message units.

- Keep the current draft focused on "transparent multihop", but make sure that it does not preclude "serviceable multihop" which could be described in a future conformance profile (e.g. transparent and serviceable correspond to two levels of conformance for intermediaries)

 

-jacques