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

[Matthew Lovett <MLOVETT@uk.ibm.com>]

Hi Anish,

The EPR added by issue 90 gives a place
where protocol messages can be sent, but does not restrict the endpoints
that can be used for application messages. You might be right that we should
have been even looser - perhaps we should have said something more like:

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

Cheers,

Matt


Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
wrote on 22/03/2006 16:51:31:

> 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
> >> -- 
> > 
> >