[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsbpel-implement] what attributes the correlation knows about incoming messages?
Bernd, In our case, we rely on knowing the
partner link and operation for an incoming message, and the “normal”
input to the engine consists of the partner link, operation and the message
itself. I do not really understand why the partner link is so hard to discern,
since when a BPEL process is deployed, the engine knows what partner links,
port types and, ultimately, ports that are used to realize the operations of
the process. In our case, the communications binding that is constructed during
deployment is responsible for creating a “static” route between the
actual port, regardless if it is a Web Service, .NET, JMS, EJB, etc. binding, and
the partner link/operation. Regards, Kristofer From: Eckenfels. Bernd
[mailto:B.Eckenfels@seeburger.de] Hello,
this
is a question to implementors, how they understood the specification:
if
I asume a SOAP Servlet, which will receive HTTP Calls with SOAP (maybe a Axis
Srvice or something like this), it receives a SOAP Call on a specified URL (ip,
port, local part) to a method and with a specific message type. With
those parameters, the servlet can look up the operation and port type.
(since those are not part of the soap call) It
also has some information about the called (ip, basic authentication, xml
security, soap headers) and may be able to lookup a implementation specific
trading partner. But,
it has a hard time to actually know about a partner link. In fact due to
correlations it may not even try to find out the partner link. So
I asume, that the normal "input" to the correlation engine of a BPEL
engine is the representation of the call, the portType/operation, but not the
partner link. This also means, that the correlation must be able to find the
input message across multiple receives from different or the same process
definitions (i.e. with different partner links). I
also guess, that most engines will support some policies for actually
restricting incoming messages to a subset of the receive activities, but thtat
does not affect the basic asumption, that the implementaiotn of a bpel engine
has to deal with events to a specified porttype/operation with unspecified
partner link. Especially
since in the incoming case late binding is as common as in the outgoing case
(partners and partner links in process definitions are very often only
"roles" in B2B scenarios). Mit
freundlichen Grüßen |
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]