sca-bindings message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: [sca-bindings] [Issue 2] Inlined proposal v2
- From: Mike Edwards <mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com>
- To: OASIS Bindings <sca-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 08:48:32 +0100
Folks,
I agree with Eric.
There should be no mandatory requirement
to support the WS-MC flavour of this. It should be purely optional.
Yours, Mike.
Strategist - Emerging Technologies, SCA & SDO.
Co Chair OASIS SCA Assembly TC.
IBM Hursley Park, Mail Point 146, Winchester, SO21 2JN, Great Britain.
Phone & FAX: +44-1962-818014 Mobile: +44-7802-467431
Email: mike_edwards@uk.ibm.com
From:
| Eric Johnson <eric@tibco.com>
|
To:
| Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
|
Cc:
| Simon Nash <oasis@cjnash.com>,
OASIS Bindings <sca-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
Date:
| 14/05/2009 18:59
|
Subject:
| Re: [sca-bindings] [Issue 2] Inlined
proposal v2 |
Hi Anish,
Anish Karmarkar wrote:
Simon Nash wrote:
Anish,
As currently written, the conformance section requires that
implementations claiming support for the SCA Web Services
Callback Protocol MUST support both the "regular" flavor
defined in section 5 and the WS-MC flavor defined in section
5.1. I thought the intention was to give these two flavors
equal status and allow implementations to support either or
both of them.
I had thought otherwise. I.e., a runtime is required to support both. A
particular service/composite gets to choose whether it wants to use polling
or host a listener. I don't feel strongly about this, but we should discuss
as to what we would like.
I side with Simon here. In the scenario where I
support callbacks, I can have lots of reasons for not supporting callbacks
via a polling mechanism. To wit:
- Security
- Latency
- Bandwidth consumption
There are
other, far better ways to send messages asynchronously (JMS, SMTP, XMPP),
and mandating that any implementation that supports the direct callback
mechanism must also support the polling callback flies in the face of this
simple technical observation. Why would we want to mandate the use
of an inferior approach?
-Eric.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates
this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
3AU
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]