RE: [ws-rx] Proposal to close i001

["Lei Jin" <ljin@bea.com>]

Title: Message

This issue results from my question at the F2F which asks whether the offer element (bilateral sequence negotiation) is merely an optimization or a mandatory feature. 

The following language from the RM policy document seems to suggest that offer must be and must only be used with a request/response MEP.

 

Per WS-ReliableMessaging [WS-RM], a wsrm:CreateSequence request MAY contain an offer to create an “inbound” Sequence. If the RM policy assertion is attached to an endpoint declaring only input messages, the endpoint MUST reject a wsrm:CreateSequence request containing a wsrm:Offer to create a corresponding Sequence. If the assertion is attached to an endpoint declaring both input and output messages, the endpoint MUST reject a wsrm:CreateSequence request that does not contain a wsrm:Offer to create a corresponding Sequence.

 

I would be open to restating this issue to remove any ambiguity or opening a new issue.

 

Lei

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Marc Goodner [mailto:mgoodner@microsoft.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 5:32 PM
To: Doug Davis
Cc: Lei Jin; ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [ws-rx] Proposal to close i001

The issue as recorded is maddeningly vague and allows for some interpretation. My interpretation focused mainly on when is it required or not which speaks to the request/response aspect that you cite below and I believe is covered by i021. No where in the issue is the Offer element mentioned nor in the minutes from which this issue was raised. I still believe this issue should be closed with no action. If there is an issue here not covered by i021 a new issue should be raised that captures it.

 

We should not have issues this open to interpretation. Restating it in such a way as to remove ambiguity would be redefining it and wouldn’t be any more work than simply raising a new issue. I don’t see this as that big a deal as this was the first issue raised in the TC before we established the process we are using now.

 

---

From: Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 23, 2005 6:10 PM
To: Marc Goodner
Cc: Lei Jin; ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] Proposal to close i001

 

Marc - I think i001 is different from i021 - as I understand them.  i001 seems to focus specifically on the Offer element.  And in particular, is it just there for request/response or can Offer also flow in a CreateSeq for one-ways.  I've always viewed Offer as just an optimization that _can_ be used in _any_ CreateSequence flow regardless of the MEP.  But perhaps Lei Jin had something else in mind.
-Doug

"Marc Goodner" <mgoodner@microsoft.com>

08/23/2005 07:12 PM

To	<ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>, "Lei Jin" <ljin@bea.com>
cc
Subject	[ws-rx] Proposal to close i001

 

This issue was raised at the F2F and it looks like a new more detailed issue, i021, addresses it. I suggest we close it as follows.
 
Proposal:
This issue has been raised again with more detail as i021. This issue should be closed with no action and tagged as related to issue i021 “An RM Policy applies two-way”.