Re: [ws-rx] PR33 - Re: [ws-rx] NEW Issue back-channel not defined

[Paul Fremantle <paul@wso2.com>]

Chris

I'm still not sure why *we* are defining backchannel. It seems to me 
that belongs in WS-A. However, if we were to, I would prefer to refer to 
in terms of WS-A:

Backchannel: The term Backchannel as used in this specification means a 
transport protocol specific facility that allows transmission of a 
protocol response message on the transport-specific connection indicated 
by the use of the WS-Addressing anonymous URI.

Paul


Christopher B Ferris wrote:
>
> All,
>
> Bob and I have noodled on a definition of backchannel that we believe 
> addresses the concerns expressed in PR33
>
> Proposed resolution:
>
> Add the following definiton to the glossary section as follows:
>
> Backchannel: The term Backchannel as used in this specification means 
> a transport protocol specific facility that allows transmission of a 
> protocol response message on a given connection in the direction 
> towards the entity that initiated that connection.
>
> 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
>
> "Bob Freund-Hitachi" <bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com> wrote on 
> 11/07/2006 01:00:26 PM:
>
> > The WS-RM spec uses the term “back-channel” several times without
> > defining it outside of the use “protocol specific back-channel”
> >
> > A cursory scan of rfc 2616 HTTP 1.1 does not define the term.
> > It is also not defined in SOAP 1.2 Parts 0-3
> > Where is the term defined?
> > That definition should be referenced or a definition provided
> >
> > Thanks
> > -bob 

-- 
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