[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] Issue 28: MakeConnection preconditions are unclear
Gil I also share your unease. I also am uneasy about saying that MC is always on. There is a different security model implicit in supporting MC. I don't want some random person polling for messages and reading them. Therefore I believe that the server ought to be able to clearly know if a client is going to use MC or not, and potentially refuse an offer or not send a CS based on that. I still think that your last case is a pretty clear indication but as the spec doesn't state this I think we have a problem. Paul Gilbert Pilz wrote: > Paul, > > Here's a CreateSequence with a non-Anon AcksTo and an Anon Offer/Endpoint. > > <wsrm:CreateSequence> > <wsrm:AcksTo> > > <wsa:Address>http://192.168.0.102:9090/axis/services/RMService</wsa:Address> > </wsrm:AcksTo> > <wsrm:Offer> > > <wsrm:Identifier>uuid:2901b650-5952-11db-b92b-881536e8c557</wsrm:Identifier> > <wsrm:Endpoint> > > <wsa:Address>http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/anonymous</wsa:Address> > <wsrm:Endpoint> > </wsrm:Offer> > </wsrm:CreateSequence> > > If I'm an RMD and I receive one of these (and I accept the Offer) should I > assume that MC(SequenceID) is going to be used? I would think so, but the > spec doesn't say one way or another. > > Here's a CreateSequence with an Anon AcksTo and a non-Anon Offer/Endpoint. > > <wsrm:CreateSequence> > <wsrm:AcksTo> > > <wsa:Address>http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/anonymous</wsa:Address> > </wsrm:AcksTo> > <wsrm:Offer> > > <wsrm:Identifier>uuid:2901b650-5952-11db-b92b-881536e8c557</wsrm:Identifier> > <wsrm:Endpoint> > > <wsa:Address>http://192.168.0.102:9090/axis/services/RMService</wsa:Address> > <wsrm:Endpoint> > </wsrm:Offer> > </wsrm:CreateSequence> > > Sould an RMD assume that MC(SequenceID) is going to be used? I would think > not, since you should be able to piggy-back Acks on the HTTP response > channel but, again, the spec isn't clear. > > Here's a CreateSequence with both an Anon AcksTo and an Anon Offer/Endpoint > > (... you get the point ...) > > It seems pretty clear that, if an RMD gets one of these (and accepts the > Offer), that MC(SequenceID) will need to be used but . . . > > In any case I'm pretty uncomfortable with the idea of deriving the RMS and > RMD's expected behavior from the combination of values of various elements > of the CreateSequence element. Even the MakeConnection(RM-Anon) rule of "if > you see a .../ws-rx/wsrm/200608/anonymous?id={uuid} as the value of any > wsa:Address element in CS you should expect that MC will be used" makes me a > little uneasy. > > - gp > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Paul Fremantle [mailto:paul@wso2.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2006 9:27 AM >> To: Paul Fremantle >> Cc: Doug Davis; Marc Goodner; Jonathan Marsh; >> 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 >> >> >> >> -- 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]