Re: [wsrm] message headers for Ack and Fault ??

[Sunil Kunisetty <sunil.kunisetty@oracle.com>]

Tom Rutt wrote:

> Sunil Kunisetty wrote:
>
> >Tom Rutt wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>Sunil Kunisetty wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>><JD> I understand that this messageHeader serves a purpose in Responses,
> >>>>but still that seems quite contrived: we apparently use it only for
> >>>>matching
> >>>>the ReplyPattern elements between req and resp.
> >>>>I believe our design would be tighter if we added the returned
> >>>>ReplyPattern
> >>>>to the RM:Response element, as Sunil hints at as a possible alternative.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> +1 ;-)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>I take this to mean that you, Sunil, have no problems with the reply not
> >>having its own message ID.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Yes, that's correct.
> >
> >
> >
> >>If such is the case, an alternative to putting the reply pattern in the
> >>respons is to have a separate header element
> >>defined for a poll response.  This new heeader could have a schema to
> >>convey fault info as well as a list of delivered messag ids.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> > I don't think we need a different Header element, a simple optional attribute
> > would suffice.
> >
> A different header syntax for poll would allow returning fault info as
> well as the ack info.

 But did we even decide on such header? I haven't see any proposal yet.
 I for one prefer the same header/element whether it is response, callback,
 or poll pattern.

 I can think of few problems interleaving faults with ack. I'll hold them until
 I see the actual proposal.

>
>
> >
> >
> >
> >>>>Further, I believe the ReplyPattern element in a request, would be
> >>>>more at its
> >>>>place in the RM:Request element, as it should be associated with the
> >>>>element
> >>>>that has "request semantics".
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>> +1
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Doing so, the MessageHeader element would only contain ID and general
> >>>>message info,
> >>>>and would only need be included in "reliable messages", as
> >>>>the second sentence in 3.1. clearly suggests already (at odds with
> >>>>current usage).
> >>>>Later on when we have RM:Response piggybacking on business messages,
> >>>>the info in
> >>>>messageHeader would be totally orthogonal to the info in RM:Response.
> >>>>
> >>>>jacques
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>--
> >>----------------------------------------------------
> >>Tom Rutt                email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@fsw.fujitsu.com
> >>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/leave_workgroup.php.
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Tom Rutt                email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@fsw.fujitsu.com
> Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133