[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: [no subject]
There are two possible interpretations:=20 (1) Although, there are two separate roles of RMS and RMD, it is the RMD who owns the WSDL and dictates all these parameters. This means the BRI, EB although are defined for RMS, are not really defined by RMS. RMS in essence has no control over these parameters. Note that this interpretation appears to contradict the Lines 112-113 and 117-119. (2) All the parameters appearing in a WSDL for RMD are applicable for the RMD only. However each parameter is scoped to request and/or response. For example, the BRI, EB and IT will apply when the RMD acts in a sender role (for a response message), and only the IT and AI apply in the RMD's receiver role (for a request message). RMS is free to use its own parameters. Note that this interpretation appears to conflict with the example provided in Section 2.3, lines 225-227 where RMS is mentioned, but it is not stated that the RMD will be in the role of sender when these parameters apply.=20 It is not clear which of the above interpretations is correct. Further, different sections of the specification are in conflict with each other regardless of the interpretation assumed as illustrated above. Justification:=20 It should be clear in the specification where the assertion parameters apply and how. Currently, there are two distinct and possible interpretations leading to confusion. Further, not making the clarification affects resolution of issues that pertain to attachment of policy in general since it is not obvious how the RM Assertion parameters apply with respect to the roles that are acknowledged in the specification.=20 Target: policy Type: design Proposal:=20 Clarify and explicitly state in the specification that each role manages its own parameters. Update the example to include in the WSDL only the parameters that are applicable to RMD: IT and AI. In addition, clarify whether the parameters that apply to RMS may be used within the content of RM Assertions and when. Detailed proposal: TBD.=20 Related Issues: i021, i006 References:=20 [1] http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/14793/ws rmp-1.1-spec-wd-01.pdf ---------------------- Dr. Umit Yalcinalp Standards Architect NetWeaver Industry Standards SAP Labs, LLC umit.yalcinalp@sap.com Tel: (650) 320-3095=20 ------_=_NextPart_001_01C5D435.2FDC7A9D Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN"> <HTML> <HEAD> <META HTTP-EQUIV=3D"Content-Type" CONTENT=3D"text/html; = charset=3Dus-ascii"> <META NAME=3D"Generator" CONTENT=3D"MS Exchange Server version = 6.5.7232.7"> <TITLE>NEW ISSUE: Target of RM Assertion parameters are confusing with = respect to how they are specified and attached</TITLE> </HEAD> <BODY> <!-- Converted from text/rtf format --> <BR> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Title: Target of RM Assertion = parameters are confusing with respect to how they are specified and = attached</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Description: </FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Currently the WS-RM Policy Assertion = describes four distinctive parameters in Section 2.1 [1]: Base = Retransmission Interval, Exponential Backoff, Inactivity Timeout and = Acknowledgement Interval. Further, these parameters are scoped with = respect to two distinct roles as summarized below:</FONT></P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">RMS: </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">-- Base Retransmission Interval = (BRI)</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">-- Exponential Backoff (EB)</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">-- Inactivity Timeout (IT)</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">RMD: </FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">-- Inactivity Timeout (IT)</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">-- Acknowledgement Interval = (AI)</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Clearly there is a separation between = which roles these assertions would apply in the specification. = However, the definition of the RM assertion includes ALL of the = parameters regardless of the role. This causes a problem in = interpreting what is being intended in Section 2.3 [1] which describes = attachment of the policy.</FONT></P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">From the perspective of WSDL, the = service is always described from the perspective of the provider and = lists the requirements of the provider. Hence the WS-Policy attachment = of RM Assertion will appear to apply to RMD alone. If we were to take = this assumption into consideration, semantics of supplying all the 4 = parameters in a RM Assertion is not very clear.</FONT></P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">There are two possible interpretations: = </FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">(1) Although, there are two separate = roles of RMS and RMD, it is the RMD who owns the WSDL and dictates all = these parameters. This means the BRI, EB although are defined for RMS, = are not really defined by RMS. RMS in essence has no control over these = parameters. Note that this interpretation appears to contradict = the Lines 112-113 and 117-119.</FONT></P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">(2) All the parameters appearing in a = WSDL for RMD are applicable for the RMD only. However each parameter is = scoped to request and/or response. For example, the BRI, EB and IT will = apply when the RMD acts in a sender role (for a response message), and = only the IT and AI apply in the RMD’s receiver role (for a request = message). RMS is free to use its own parameters. Note that this = interpretation appears to conflict with the example provided in Section = 2.3, lines 225-227 where RMS is mentioned, but it is not stated = that the RMD will be in the role of sender when these parameters apply. = </FONT></P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">It is not clear which of the above = interpretations is correct. Further, different sections of the = specification are in conflict with each other regardless of the = interpretation assumed as illustrated above.</FONT></P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Justification: </FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">It should be clear in the specification = where the assertion parameters apply and how. Currently, there are two = distinct and possible interpretations leading to confusion. Further, not = making the clarification affects resolution of issues that pertain to = attachment of policy in general since it is not obvious how the RM = Assertion parameters apply with respect to the roles that are = acknowledged in the specification. </FONT></P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Target: policy</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Type: design</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Proposal: </FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Clarify and explicitly state in the = specification that each role manages its own parameters. Update the = example to include in the WSDL only the parameters that are applicable = to RMD: IT and AI. In addition, clarify whether the parameters that = apply to RMS may be used within the content of RM Assertions and = when.</FONT></P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Detailed proposal: TBD. </FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Related Issues: i021, i006</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">References: </FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">[1] </FONT><A = HREF=3D"http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/1= 4793/wsrmp-1.1-spec-wd-01.pdf"><U><FONT COLOR=3D"#0000FF" SIZE=3D2 = FACE=3D"Arial">http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/downloa= d.php/14793/wsrmp-1.1-spec-wd-01.pdf</FONT></U></A> </P> <BR> <BR> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">----------------------</FONT> </P> <P><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Dr. Umit Yalcina</FONT><FONT SIZE=3D2 = FACE=3D"Arial">lp</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Standards Architect</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">NetWeaver Industry Standards</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">SAP Labs, LLC</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">umit.yalcinalp@sap.com</FONT> <BR><FONT SIZE=3D2 FACE=3D"Arial">Tel: (650) 320-3095 </FONT> </P> </BODY> </HTML> ------_=_NextPart_001_01C5D435.2FDC7A9D--
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]