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

[Paul Fremantle <paul@wso2.com>]

Aha of course. I wasn't trying to restrict this to the WSA anon URI, 
simply to say "this is the same backchannel that would be described if 
you used the WSA anon URI". I guess my wording isn't that clear, tho I 
do think it can be read that way. Is this better?

Backchannel: The term Backchannel as used in this specification means a
transport-protocol specific facility that allows transmission of a
protocol response message. This MAY be indicated by the use of the 
WS-Addressing Anonymous URI, or another anonymous URI.

Paul



Doug Davis wrote:
>
> Don't think you want to be that specific to say which URI as there 
> could be lots of URIs that mean "the back-channel"
>
> 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>*
>
> 12/11/2006 02:00 PM
>
> 	
> To
> 	Christopher B Ferris/Waltham/IBM@IBMUS
> cc
> 	"[WS-RX]" <ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Subject
> 	Re: [ws-rx] PR33 - Re: [ws-rx] NEW Issue back-channel not defined
>
>
>
> 	
>
>
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
>

-- 
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