Re: [ws-rx] i021 proposal

[Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>]

I believe the responses will be secured
as well.
-Doug

Paul Fremantle <paul@wso2.com>

02/10/2006 09:00 AM

To	Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
cc	ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject	Re: [ws-rx] i021 proposal

Doug

I need someone to explain to me how the other specs work, as I'm not 
familiar with them.

For example when there is a security policy for web service, is the 
default to assume that all response messages are unsecured?

Paul

Doug Davis wrote:
>
> Paul,
>   I'm just looking at the other ws-* specs w.r.t. policy and
they 
> don't seem to make the
> kind of distinctions we're thinking about making.  Either 'foo'
is on 
> or off - that's about
> all they say - and its very simple.  If we deviate from that
pattern 
> we run the risk of
> RM being a special case.  If we believe those other specs are
wrong 
> then we should
> push the policy experts to agree to that and then we can be the first
> to "do it right", but
> until then I'm not keen on RM being the oddball.
> -Doug
>
>
>
> *Paul Fremantle <paul@wso2.com>*
>
> 02/10/2006 08:45 AM
>
>                  
> To
>                  Doug
Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
> cc
>                  ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject
>                  Re:
[ws-rx] i021 proposal
>
>
>
>                  
>
>
>
>
>
> Doug, Umit,
>
> I think there is a simplicity to this. What you are sating is that
there
> is no way of expressing in a req-resp WSDL the fact that both directions
> are expected to be reliable.
> That may be a logical conclusion but its not clear that it fits the
> expected usage of RM in a req-resp scenario.
>
> Paul
>
> Doug Davis wrote:
> >
> > "Yalcinalp, Umit" <umit.yalcinalp@sap.com> wrote
on 02/09/2006
> > 09:43:16 PM:
> > ...
> > > It seems to me if it would be cleaner to leave the one-way
policy
> > > assertion at the input message only, so that for the "outbound
> messages"
> > > the receiving end's policy assertion would apply. I am thinking
in 
> terms
> > > reconciling the policies of RMS and RMD at both ends (including
> > > extensibility). I think binding/operation/input message
should be
> > > sufficient and is simpler.
> >
> > +1 - keep it simple (and consistent with the other ws-* specs)
> >
> > -Doug
>
> -- 
>
> Paul Fremantle
> VP/Technology, WSO2 and OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair
>
> http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle
> paul@wso2.com
>
> "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
>
>

-- 

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

http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle
paul@wso2.com

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