ws-rx message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: RE: [ws-rx] Usage of Ref parms for WS-Reliable Messaging
- From: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
- To: Marc Goodner <mgoodner@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 11:44:22 -0400
No, the RM anon URI identifies the RMD
resource. The fact that an implementation may choose to establish
a queue of messages targetted at a specific
RMD resource does not imply that the URI identifies that queue
of messages.
The RM anon URI does not identify the
back-channel either. It identifies the anon RMD resource. The
MakeConnection mechanism uses the protocol-specific
back-channel to enable the sending endpoint to
transfer any messages targetted to a
particular RMD resource identified in the MakeConnection message.
You are creating issues out of nothing.
Cheers,
Christopher Ferris
STSM, Software Group Standards Strategy
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/chrisferris
phone: +1 508 377 9295
Marc Goodner <mgoodner@microsoft.com> wrote
on 09/29/2006 09:32:26 PM:
> The RM anon URI identifies the client, the
> queue/bucket/store/whatever on the server to hold pending messages
> to the client, and the backchannel. I count three resources there.
A
> URI represents a resource. So the current approach is not without
> its issues either.
>
> From: Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 29, 2006 4:04 PM
> To: tom@coastin.com
> Cc: wsrx
> Subject: Re: [ws-rx] Usage of Ref parms for WS-Reliable Messaging
>
>
> Tom,
> Where in the RM spec does it talk about queues? It doesn't,
so I think
> you're bringing in an impl choice into the discussion. The spec
says:
> This specification defines a URI template (the WS-RM anonymous
URI)
> which may be used to uniquely identify anonymous Endpoints.
> Its very consistent in this respect.
> The URI template was not created to specify a queue, it was established
> so that we can uniquely identity one anonymous endpoint from another.
> Clearly a fixed URI (wsa's anon) doesn't allow for this. Given
all
> of the heated discussions around whether ref-p's can or should be
used
> to identify an endpoint it would not be wise to reverse decisions
that
> have been made that clearly indicate ref-p's are not for this purpose.
> All of that being said, w.r.t. queues...how an implementation chooses
> to manage messages targeted to a particular endpoint is up to it and
> is out of scope for this spec to specify.
>
> thanks,
> -Doug
>
> Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com> wrote on 09/29/2006 02:32:55 AM:
> > quoted from 9/28 minutes:
> >
> > "
> > Chris: We are not in agreement. I don’t want to use reference
params
> > because they violate the Web Architecture. WSA WG ignored TAGs
issues.
> > Paul: I’m not at all in agreement. The reference parameters
are not used
> > to identify a resource, they are used to identify a particular
RMD.
> > "
> >
> > I think that using a ref parm to identify a MakeConnection Queue
could
> > be considered application level information associated with a
particular
> > endpoint address.
> >
> > I really think, if we wanted to, we could work out a specification
of a
> > use of a ref parm, which when added to the generic wsa:anonymous
URI in
> > the address
> > field of an EPR, identifies the "make connection" queue
which will
> > utiize the back channel only when it is appropriate (i.e, when
a make
> > connection is received with that queue ID).
> >
> > What I am trying to say is that only the address is needed for
> > dispatching the message to the appropriate location, and that
the a
> > queueID ref parm could indicate when that anonymous back channel
is
> > appropriate for use.
> >
> > Tom Rutt
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]