Re: [sca-bindings] NEW ISSUE: No conformance statement for SCA WSCallback Protocol

[Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>]

On 2/25/2010 12:14 AM, Mike Edwards wrote:
>
> Anish,
>
> I have no problem with you raising this issue.
>
> I do have a problem with raising this issue with no proposed resolution.
> What proposal do you have for conformance to the WS Callback protocol?
>
> One thing I note is that a non-SCA client is not something that should
> be in the
> scope of the conformance statements of the SCA specifications. I think
> that it
> is reasonable for the SCA specifications to describe the conformance
> requirements for an SCA runtime to conform to the WS Callback protocol.
> However, what a non-SCA program does with the protocol is beyond our
> jurisdiction.
>

In that case, the notion that WS-* is SCA's answer to interop outside 
the domain boundary has no basis. Or at the very least SCA bidirectional 
interfaces/services are not interoperable.
The primary reason to define this protocol here is to provide interop 
outside the domain boundary, otherwise an implementation can implement 
the callback mechanism whichever way it ways. Without such a need to 
interop, I don't know why we spent time defining this.

> The protocol specifications can say what the SCA runtime must or should
> do in
> the case of a partner that "misbehaves" (ie sends messages that do not
> conform
> to the protocol) - but it cannot say what the partner must or should do.
>

What kind of a partner? Inside the domain? If so, then the SCA runtime 
is not conformant. In any case how would you know that -- this stuff 
happens on the wire, unless you are examining the messages you have no idea.
If the partner is outside the domain, then it is a Callback protocol client.

In any case, we are defining a protocol. We are defining a SOAP-based 
protocol that can be, (and I'll argue needs to be) and is, completely 
independent of an SCA runtime. All it needs is the definition of what a 
callback means and something in the WSDL that tells the WSDL consumer 
what to do. Oh, wait, but we already have that ;-)

A SOAP-based protocol to achieve a common usecase of callback, with a 
good definition of what a callback means. Check.
A WSDL extension to correlate forward and callback interface/portTypes. 
Check.
A WS-Policy assertion to assert the use of the protocol. Check.
Seems like it walks, talks and quacks like a SOAP/WSDL/WS-Policy based 
WS-* spec to me.

-Anish
--

>
> 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: 	Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
> To: 	OASIS Bindings <sca-bindings@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Date: 	25/02/2010 07:14
> Subject: 	[sca-bindings] NEW ISSUE: No conformance statement for SCA WS
> Callback Protocol
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> Title: No conformance statement for SCA WS Callback Protocol
>
> Specification: WS Binding
>
> Description:
> The conformance section (section 6) of the WS binding specifies
> conformance for SCA WS Binding XML document and SCA runtime. But the
> spec also defines SCA WS-CP and associated policy assertion. There is no
> conformance statement associated with SCA WS-CP. A non-SCA client is
> expected to interop with bidirectional SCA services using SCA WS-CP, but
> it is not clear what such a non-SCA client that wants to conform to the
> protocol is supposed to do.
>
>
> -Anish
> --
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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/
>
>
>
>
>
>