OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsdm message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: RE: [wsdm] Concrete, practical interop question

Hi Mike,

I'll try to answer your questions.

> This question pertains to the interop for the upcoming F2F.

As far as I know, there is no interop event planned at the next F2F
other than interoperability between my mouth and my snorkel (which I
successfully tested in my bathtub last evening).

But the questions are still interesting to discuss.

> C: Consumer: consumer of manageability provider
> MP: manageability provider
> MR: managed resource
> Scenario:
> C is given an URL to obtain the WSDL for MP.
> From that WSDL, C obtains the URL to invoke calls on the MP.
> C can now make a call to MP.
> But these calls are generic such as "getStatus" and do not explicitly
> mention an MR.
> And the MP has no operation for C to ask what MRs it is managing.
> So C must already (somehow) know about a MR that MP is managing.
> And C must (somehow) "identify" this MR in its call to MP.
> But since operations on MP don't specify MR as a parameter,
> C must identify MR in the SOAP header, or URL or something like that.

In our model, the only two real actors are the consumer (C) and the
managed resource (MR). The manageability providers exists because it is
the infrastructure that ensures that the MR gets the messages sent to
it, but it doesn't receive messages of its own. It is just a conduit to
get the messages routed to the MR, where the processing happens. So for
all practical purposes I don't think it is helpful to mention the MP in
these scenarios. The WSDL describes the manageability capabilities of
the MR, not the MP.

Here is how I would like to rephrase your scenario:

- C is given a URL to obtain the WSDL for a MR.
- From that WSDL, C nows where to send messages to the MR.
- But the implied resource pattern specifies that these messages might
require additional headers to be properly routed and these headers do
not appear in the WSDL (or if they do, their actual content is not

> Here is what I *think* the answers to the questions are:
> C assumes that the URL it got from the MP WSDL is unique to one
> particular MR.
> Thus, C doesn't need to identify a MR in each call, because 
> all calls it
> sends to the MP at that URL, automatically apply to some 
> particular MR.
> Thus, C just calls operations on MP without identifying any MR.
> If that is so, then each MR will have its own unique URL to obtain for
> the WSDL for its MP, and that WSDL will specify a MP URL which is
> specific to that MR.
> Is that right?

Yes, this is what was done for the interop at the last F2F. And it is
one possible scenarion. But please allow me to rephrase your description
this along the lines described above:

- C assumes that there is a MR described by this WSDL which does not
require any SOAP header in the message.
- Thus C just calls operations on the MR without any additional SOAP
header for dispatching.

Note that this solution is what we assumed was the case in our previous
interop but might not be the general solution. Issue [Disc02] is about
this special case and whether to put something in the WSDL to call it



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]