RE: [ws-rx] issue 115: clarifying question

Why would anything need to go in the header? The spec that defines the header would define what if any relationship it had to body content.

Marc Goodner

Technical Diplomat

Microsoft Corporation

Tel: (425) 703-1903

Blog: http://spaces.msn.com/mrgoodner/

From: Gilbert Pilz [mailto:Gilbert.Pilz@bea.com]
Sent: Monday, April 24, 2006 2:41 PM
To: wsrx
Subject: [ws-rx] issue 115: clarifying question

During the conference call of 4/20/2006 Chris asserted that you can use a SOAP header with a mustUnderstand attribute to flag the fact that some element in either another header or in the message body is an extension that must be understood by the receiver. I'm not sure I understood exactly what Chris thought this should look like. For example, imagine the following CreateSequence message. The extension elements have been marked in bold. What is supposed to go in the <wsrm:Extension> header?

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<S:Envelope xmlns:S="http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap-envelope"
xmlns:wsrm="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsrm/200604"
xmlns:wsa="http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing">
<S:Header>
<wsrm:Extension S:mustUnderstand="1">
    ????
</wsrm:Extension>
<wsa:MessageID>
   http://Business456.com/guid/0baaf88d-483b-4ecf-a6d8-a7c2eb546817
</wsa:MessageID>
<wsa:To>http://example.com/serviceB/123</wsa:To>
    <wsa:Action>http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsrm/200604/CreateSequence</wsa:Action>
<wsa:ReplyTo>
   <wsa:Address>http://Business456.com/serviceA/789</wsa:Address>
</wsa:ReplyTo>
</S:Header>
<S:Body>
<wsrm:CreateSequence>
    <wsrm:AcksTo>
      <wsa:Address>http://Business456.com/serviceA/789</wsa:Address>
    </wsrm:AcksTo>
    <wsrm:SecurityComposition>
      <wsrm:Identifier>
        http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsrmsp/200604/profile/http_auth/samenode
      </wsrm:Identifier>
    </wsrm:SecurityComposition>
</wsrm:CreateSequence>
</S:Body>
</S:Envelope>

I'm sure that most of us could all come up with a reasonable design to do what you suggest, but for the purposes of further discussion I'd like to know what design Chris had in mind?

- gp

ws-rx message