Re: [ws-rx] Proposal to resolve Issue 006

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

Tom Rutt wrote:
> Description
> 
>                Is there a requirement that the sender can assert that 
> the receiver must
>                deliver a particular reliability assurance on a given 
> sequence?
> 
> Discussion         
> It has been agreed that the protocol is the same on any ws -rm Sequence, 
> regardless of DA level agreements in place between RMD and Destination 
> Application.    There is no need to have a standard protocol mechanism 
> for the RMS to signal DA requirments on the sequence for the RMD.
> 
> If reliaiblity policy is attached to a destination endpoint at a finer 
> level of granularity than endpoint subject level,  an implementaton 
> (extension beyond normal conformance) would have to use means outside 
> the scope of this standard to convey such requirements (e.g., RMD could 
> be aware of the wsdl description).
> 

I don't see this issue as being tied to finer level of granularity. Say 
the granularity is at the message-level or operation-level. When the 
receiver receives a message, it is clear from the message which 
operation is being invoked.

The issue is about -- how does a sender indicate to the receiver that a 
particular QoS is required for a particular Sequence? This may be needed 
because the receiver supports multiple QoS and the sender wants to 
choose OR the sender is not aware of the QoS being implemented and wants 
to assert the QoS for the Sequence (and have the receiver fault on the 
CS message if it cannot).

One way I can think of doing this is to include the 
wsrm:DeliveryAssertion (as defined by the resolution of issue i009) as 
an optional element in the CreateSequence message and define a specific 
fault that the RMD can send when the wsrm:DeliveryAssertion is not 
supported/allowed.

-Anish
--

> Proposed resolution to Issue 006:
> 
> close issue with no changes to specfication.
> 
>