Subject: FW: [wsrm] Are Relays out of scope?
-----Original Message----- From: Freund, Robert Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 5:08 PM To: 'email@example.com'; Furniss, Peter Cc: wsrm Subject: RE: [wsrm] Are Relays out of scope? Actually, it is defined explicitly in the requirements that WS-RM is an end to end protocol. Of course, this does not prevent the construction of a man in the middle agent that will operate transparently with respect to both sender and receiver. -bob > -----Original Message----- > From: Tom Rutt [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] > Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 4:33 PM > To: Furniss, Peter > Cc: wsrm > Subject: [wsrm] Are Relays out of scope? > > > Furniss, Peter wrote: > > >Tom, > > > >Don't waste time on heretics like me :-) > > > >I don't think a store-and-forward relay is an intermediary > in the soap > >sense. It's obviously an intermediary in a message queueing > sense, but I > >would think it was an important (no, vital) element for some > use cases. > >What if the real sending application and the real receiving > application > >are never up at the same time ? Or is that ruled out of scope by the > >intermediaries discussion. If it is, apologies for wasting > your time. > > > >Peter > > > > > > > I think our idea of not dealing explicitly with > intermediaries means it > is an end to end protocol. > > I send this to the list to see if anyone disagrees with my > assessment of > the relay situation. > > Tom Rutt > WSRM chair > > -- > ---------------------------------------------------- > Tom Rutt email: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org > Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133 > > > > > To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from > the roster of the OASIS TC), go to > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leav > e_workgroup.php. > >