RE: [ws-rx-implement] [Fwd: FW: about InteropScenarios 0.8, scenario 1.4]

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

Right - that is fine, and capture the intent.

To be consistent though, in 1.4, I think we need to be specific in the
same way for the TerminateSequence message, and add a similar sentence
at the end ("the TerminateSequenceResposne may be sent..."), that also
align with other scenarios that are specific about this.

Cheers,
Jacques

-----Original Message-----
From: Marc Goodner [mailto:mgoodner@microsoft.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 10:26 AM
To: Paul Fremantle; Durand, Jacques R.;
ws-rx-implement@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [ws-rx-implement] [Fwd: FW: about InteropScenarios 0.8,
scenario 1.4]

I'm not sure I agree with this text. How about the following, I think it
captures the intent of the proposal below.

Replace:
"The CreateSequenceResponse is the first message to be sent on the "back
channel."

With:
"The CreateSequenceResponse may be sent on the HTTP back channel or,
when possible, via a new HTTP connection to the ReplyTo URI. Clients
must be prepared for either case."

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Fremantle [mailto:paul@wso2.com]
Sent: Monday, September 04, 2006 3:26 AM
To: ws-rx-implement@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [ws-rx-implement] [Fwd: FW: about InteropScenarios 0.8,
scenario 1.4]

Forwarded from Jacques

------------------------------------------------------------------------

*From:* Durand, Jacques R.
*Sent:* Thursday, August 31, 2006 4:19 PM
*To:* ws-rx-implement@lists.oasis-open.org
*Subject:* about InteropScenarios 0.8, scenario 1.4

(not sure I can post on this list yet... only "observer" so far - Paul
can you forward to list in case? Thx.)

Comment on Interop Scenarios 0.8:

Scenario 1.4 should not state:

"... The CreateSequenceResponse is the first message to be sent on the
"back channel." "

Indeed, the XML for CreateSequence messages does not use
ReplyTo:anonymous (consistently with all other exchanges in this
scenario)

So this means the CSR SHOULD (not a MUST, though) be sent back on a new
HTTP connection , per WSA SOAP binding spec (".. When "--/anonymous" is
not specified for the response endpoint, then ... Any response message
SHOULD be sent using a separate connection and using the address value
specified by response endpoint.")

Propose to replace:

" The CreateSequenceResponse is the first message to be sent on the
"back channel."

With:

" The CreateSequenceResponse, like other response messages to RM
protocol messages for sequence management, is sent over a new HTTP
connection to the ReplyTo URI."

Now, assuming some destination implementation may decide to not follow
what is so far only a WSA recommendation, the client side should not
choke on it. So one could add:

"in case an RMD sends back these responses over the back-channel, the
client must accept these."

Jacques


--

Paul Fremantle
VP/Technology, WSO2 and OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair

http://feeds.feedburner.com/bloglines/pzf
paul@wso2.com

"Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com