ws-rx message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] PR Issue 13 SequenceAcknowledgement protocol response forAcksTo = wsa:anonymous
- From: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
- To: Paul Fremantle <paul@wso2.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2006 09:17:09 -0500
Does this text in the spec cover it:
During creation of a Sequence the RM
Source MAY specify the WS-Addressing anonymous IRI as the
address of the AcksTo EPR for that Sequence.
When the RM Source specifies the WS-Addressing
anonymous IRI as the address of the
AcksTo EPR, the RM Destination MUST Transmit any
SequenceAcknowledgement headers for
the created Sequence in a SOAP envelope to be Transmitted
on the protocol binding-specific channel.
Such a channel is provided by the context of a Received
message containing a SOAP envelope that
contains a Sequence header block and/or an AckRequested
header block for that same Sequence
identifier.
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>
11/16/2006 05:35 AM
|
To
| Marc Goodner <mgoodner@microsoft.com>
|
cc
| "ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org"
<ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
Subject
| Re: [ws-rx] PR Issue 13 SequenceAcknowledgement
protocol response for AcksTo = wsa:anonymous |
|
I'm not suggesting we define HTTP binding issues in
our spec. I'm
pondering the following:
In the case where there is an anonymous AcksTo and an AckRequested, the
RMD SHOULD respond with the SequenceAck on the backchannel of the
request that carried the AckReq.
Paul
Marc Goodner wrote:
> Paul,
>
> We can't describe HTTP binding issues in our spec, underlying transports
are simply out of scope. I don't have any issue with recommending they
forward this issue to a group like WS-I's RSP WG where HTTP is in scope
of their work.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Paul Fremantle [mailto:paul@wso2.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 15, 2006 12:08 AM
> To: Marc Goodner
> Cc: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: Re: [ws-rx] PR Issue 13 SequenceAcknowledgement protocol
response for AcksTo = wsa:anonymous
>
> Marc
>
> In the case of AckRequested over an anon HTTP connection, I believe
the
> RMD should respond directly. After all it doesn't know when the next
> HTTP connection will come in to respond on. So I think they have a
point
> and we should state this.
>
> Paul
>
> Marc Goodner wrote:
>
>> PR Issue 13,
>> http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/issues/pr/Issues.xml#i013 , asks
if
>> an ack needs to be mapped to the original HTTP Response for the
>> message. It also suggests that maybe wsaAnonymous is not an allowed
>> value for acksTo and if so should be explicitly forbidden.
>>
>> I do not believe wsa:Anonymous should be barred from use in acksTo.
I
>> think the spec is pretty clear that the only barred value is wsa:None.
>>
>> I don't think we can address the mapping of an ack in this case
to the
>> HTTP layer as the underlying binding is out of our scope. In this
case
>> I think the specification already allows flexibility to send an
ack on
>> the HTTP response for the original request, or on a subsequent
request
>> including using AckRequested.
>>
>> If everyone else agrees I suggest we provide that feedback and
close
>> this issue with no action.
>>
>>
>
> --
> 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]