OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ws-rx message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: RE: [ws-rx] Proposed new issue: spec talks about delivery assurances but does not clearly relate them to the protocol


 
I think the proposal (primarily a> and b> below) makes sense. It addresses one of my concerns that describing DA in two places and maintaining consistency between them will be an ongoing headache for all of us. I would however suggest not to entirely remove references to DA in the WS-RM spec. IMHO, it is a common expectation that a reliable messaging specification *talks* about DA (normatively or otherwise). We could leave some text in the WS-RM spec that describes the general concept of DA and also makes it clear that the RM protocol remains unchanged no matter what DA is used between the RM and the App layers.
 
I don't see a critical need for c>, especially since we have agreed that the protocol does not vary based on the DA in use.
 
Thanks,
Sanjay
 


From: Stefan Batres [mailto:stefanba@microsoft.com]
Sent: Monday, Sep 26, 2005 10:04 AM
To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [ws-rx] Proposed new issue: spec talks about delivery assurances but does not clearly relate them to the protocol

Description:

The WS-ReliableMessaging specification talks about delivery assurances but does not clearly relate them to the protocol.

 

Justification:

This vague definition of the relationship between delivery assurances and the protocol has caused (extreme) confusion and does not clearly describe how the protocol is intended to be used.

 

Proposals:

One proposal that has been kicked around by the TC consists of:

a)     Remove all references to delivery assurances from the WS-RM spec.

b)     Describe, in detail, DA’s in the policy spec (since we’re adding an Assurances element to that document anyway).

c)      Create a new deliverable for the TC; a profiles document. The profiles would describe how the protocol should be used to implement the various delivery assurances.

Other variants on this have been proposed as well. The point is to make it more obvious that DA’s are a contract between RMS/RMD and apps whereas the protocol is about guaranteed transfer between RMS and RMD and enables the implementation of DA’s between RMS/RMD and apps.

 

Comments?

 

--Stefan



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]