OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ws-rx message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [ws-rx] Issue 28: MakeConnection preconditions are unclear



LOL thanks for the levity on an otherwise boring Tuesday.

Any use of WSA's anonymous in an EPR can't possibly be used in this way.  First, show me where in any spec it says this.  Second, its not very hard to imagine cases where the RMS (client) wants its Acks to be sent back synchronously even if its responses are sent asynchronously to some other endpoint.  The RMS can easily get its acks even w/o MC by sending an AckRequested.  Overloading the meaning of the WSA anonymous URI in this way is asking for interop issues and would limit the set of scenarios RM could be used by adding an implication that some EPR+wsa:Anon == must use MC - especially when some people in this TC have made it clear they may not support MC at all (in any form).

thanks
-Doug

__________________________________________________
STSM | Web Services Architect | IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905 | IBM T/L 444-6906 | dug@us.ibm.com



Paul Fremantle <paul@wso2.com>

11/14/2006 12:26 PM

To
Paul Fremantle <paul@wso2.com>
cc
Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, Marc Goodner <mgoodner@microsoft.com>, Jonathan Marsh <jonathan@wso2.com>, "ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org" <ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject
Re: [ws-rx] Issue 28: MakeConnection preconditions are unclear





Actually I think in addition the CS/Offer/Endpoint should be anonymous
for the precondition.

Paul

Paul Fremantle wrote:
> I believe that with MC(SequenceID) I think there is a clear
> preconditiion, which is CS+Offer+Anonymous-Acks-To.
>
> Paul
>
> Doug Davis wrote:
>>
>> Sorry, not true. MSFT's proposal does not address any preconditions
>> since the ability to support MC should be known before the CS is
>> sent, not after. Sending a MCRefued in response to a MC is too late
>> in the game. No matter which version of MC lives on I think some
>> policy assertion will be needed so the server-side can advertise that
>> it will support MC, or not. I was assuming we could use this issue to
>> add that.
>>
>> As for Jonathan's text about either side needing to be in possession
>> of the RManonURI - short answer is 'no' - only the minter (client)
>> needs to know what the value is.
>>
>> thanks
>> -Doug
>> __________________________________________________
>> STSM | Web Services Architect | IBM Software Group
>> (919) 254-6905 | IBM T/L 444-6906 | dug@us.ibm.com
>>
>>
>>
>> *Marc Goodner <mgoodner@microsoft.com>*
>>
>> 11/14/2006 11:34 AM
>>
>>    
>> To
>>     Marc Goodner <mgoodner@microsoft.com>, Jonathan Marsh
>> <jonathan@wso2.com>, "ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org"
>> <ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>
>> cc
>>    
>> Subject
>>     RE: [ws-rx] Issue 28: MakeConnection preconditions are unclear
>>
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> In the proposal we made for PR001 I don’t believe the below is an
>> issue. The expected setup for MakeConection is defined.
>>
>> I agree that if we close PR001 with no action that the current spec
>> will need to be changed to address this problem.
>>
>>
>> *From:* Jonathan Marsh [mailto:jonathan@wso2.com] *
>> Sent:* Monday, November 06, 2006 9:46 AM*
>> To:* ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org*
>> Subject:* [ws-rx] New issue: MakeConnection preconditions are unclear
>>
>> MakeConnection as defined today relies on the RM Anonymous URI
>> template. The spec does not adequately specify the preconditions
>> necessary for the exchange to be successful.
>>
>> Prior to a MakeConnection message, do both the client and the server
>> have to be in possession of a correctly constructed instance of the
>> RM anon URI template? Of an EPR using this template? The example
>> messages invent a subscription operation in step 1, which indicates
>> that the precise URI and the intent to enable MakeConnection must be
>> negotiated between the RMD and RMS out of band, yet nowhere are these
>> preconditions enumerated. The RM protocol preconditions only list an
>> EPR as a precondition, not the precise form of that EPR, and any
>> intention that buffering of messages should be engaged. What happens
>> if a client does a MakeConnection without all preconditions being
>> satisfied also appears to be underspecified.
>>
>> *Jonathan Marsh* - _http://www.wso2.com_ <http://www.wso2.com/> -
>> _http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com_
>> <http://auburnmarshes.spaces.live.com/>
>>
>

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

http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle
paul@wso2.com
(646) 290 8050

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





[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]