Re: [ws-rx] Question about resolution of issue i090

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

Paul Fremantle wrote:
> I'm not sure I agree that this restricts the sequence to a single 
> endpoint. It simply associates the endpoint with the sequence (in the 
> same way that there is a CS endpoint associated with the initial sequence).
> 

I'm not sure I follow (very likely missing your point) -- specifically I 
don't know what you mean by '... CS endpoint associated with the 
*initial sequence*'.

The resolution of i090 says this about the specified endpoint:

"This REQUIRED element, of type wsa:EndpointReferenceType as specified 
by WS-Addressing [WSAddressing] specifies the endpoint reference to 
which WS-RM protocol messages related to the offered Sequence are to be 
sent."

In the non-offered sequence, RMD/RMS are fuzzy concepts not necessarily 
associated with a single EPR. For example, we talk about sending 
terminate message to the "RMD" not to a particular EPR. Doesn't this 
resolution change that for offered sequences? I.e., doesn't this 
resolution restrict the RMD to the specified EPR (for the offered sequence)?

Thanks for the response.

-Anish
--


> Paul
> 
> Anish Karmarkar wrote:
> 
>> I have a question on the resolution of issue i090 as recorded at 
>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/17304/MinutesWSRX-031606.html 
>>
>>
>> The resolution restricts the offered sequence to a single EPR. This 
>> constraints/conflicts with the resolution of an issue (can't recall 
>> the issue number) that introduced that following text at line 139-140 
>> (in CD-03):
>>
>> "Note that this specification makes no restriction on the scope of the 
>> RM Source or RM Destination entities. For example, either may span 
>> multiple WSDL Ports or endpoints."
>>
>> The intent of that resolution was to allow RMD and RMS to span 
>> multiple WSDL endpoints, EPRs etc. Was this conflict discussed during 
>> the concall? At least in the minutes this is not captured. If it was 
>> discussed, can someone post the rationale for reverting the previous 
>> decision? Was there any discussion on making 
>> /wsrm:CreateSequence/wsrm:Offer/wsrm:Endpoint optional?
>>
>> Thx!
>>
>> -Anish
>> -- 
> 
>