Re: [wsrp-interop] on initCookies and sessionID

[Subbu Allamaraju <subbu@bea.com>]

I would like to note that a Producer requring perUser init cookies may 
choose to use the same cookie for both cases (ie return a session cookie 
in response to an initCookie call, and return the same session ID in the 
pbia response).

In this case, my interpretation is that

(a) Producer returns InvalidCookie fault when the cookie from the 
request (when HTTP binding is used) is no longer valid.

(b) Poducer never returns InvalidSession fault (since this has the same 
affect, atleast for the Producer), and reinvoking initCookie() and 
resupplying data stored in sessions lets the Producer/portlet recover 
from session loss.

For the consumer,

(a) If the Consumer is strict about cookies, it does not send expired 
cookies to the Producer. So, after the cookie times out, it 
automatically invokes initCookie().

(b) If the Consumer is not strict, it may send an expired cookie to the 
Producer. The producer then returns InvalidCookie fault.

Subbu


Rich Thompson said the following on 11/19/2003 05:52 AM:
> 
> My take on the answers:
> 
> First, overall comments: Private sessions between the end-user and 
> particular instances of a portlet are modeled in the protocol via 
> sessionID. It was also recognized that various systems have reasons to 
> use a cookie to carry session information, though these types of 
> sessions are not always unique to a portlet instance. As a result, these 
> two tend to closely parallel each other while never being linked.
> 
> Q1. Is there any required relationship between the cookies returned by 
> initCookie and the sessionID returned by the markup interface calls?
> A1. No, though if the CookieProtocol is perUser then they do carry the 
> same semantics.
> 
> Q2. If a call returns an InvalidCookie fault, should the consumer 
> discard the sessionID?
> A2. No, the cookies are independent of the private sessionID and are not 
> necessarily related to a session at all.
> 
> Q3. If a call returns an InvalidSession fault, should the consumer call 
> initCookie again?
> A3. same as A2.
> 
> Sorry if the fault descriptions are confusing:
>  - InvalidSession fault is used only when the private session has timed 
> out and required data had been cached in the session (templates or 
> UserContext). If the session did not contain such data or it is also 
> available via the supplied data on the invocation, the Producer can 
> simply create a new session and include it in the returned data 
> structure for future invocations from the Consumer.
>  - InvalidCookie fault is used only when the cookies established by 
> initCookie become invalid. This signals to the Consumer the need to 
> invoke initCookie again. Since some Producers will establish a session 
> related to these cookies, it would be wise for the Consumer to resend 
> templates and UserContext when reinvoking the operation that caused the 
> InvalidCookie fault as this can avoid the next invocation returning an 
> InvalidSession fault.
> 
> Rich
> 
> 
> *Alejandro Abdelnur <Alejandro.Abdelnur@Sun.COM>*
> Sent by: Alejandro.Abdelnur@Sun.COM
> 
> 11/18/2003 07:02 PM
> 
> 	
> To
> 	wsrp-interop@lists.oasis-open.org
> cc
> 	
> Subject
> 	[wsrp-interop] on initCookies and sessionID
> 
> 
> 	
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of the engineers in my group (punished with implementing WSRP) came
> to me with the following questions and I could not find an answer for
> her. I would like to know what is your opinion on this and how are you
> handling this scenario.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Alejandro
> 
> * Producer requires initCookie.
> * Consumer uses more than one portlet from the producer for
>   the portal page of a user.
> * initCookie has been called upfront.
> * performBlockingInteraction and/or getMarkup have returned a sessionID
> 
> Q1. Is there any required relationship between the cookies returned by
> initCookie and the sessionID returned by the markup interface calls?
> 
> Q2. If a call returns an InvalidCookie fault, should the consumer
> discard the sessionID?
> 
> Q3. If a call returns an InvalidSession fault, should the consumer call
> initCookie again?
> 
> If the answer is 'no' to all the questions, then the following sections
> of the spec make things more confusing:
> 
> P27/L27 "If the Producer returns an InvalidSession fault message after
> returning a sessionID, the Consumer MUST NOT resupply that sessionID on
> a subsequent invocation and SHOULD reinvoke the operation that caused
> the fault message without any sessionID and supply any data that may
> have been stored in the session."
> 
> P44/L6 "If at any time the Producer throws a fault message
> (“InvalidCookie”) indicating the supplied cookies have been invalidated
> at the Producer, then the Consumer MUST again invoke initCookie() and
> SHOULD reprocess the invocation that caused the fault message to be
> thrown and include any data that may have been stored in a session
> related to a cookie"
> 
> P77/Table,Row=InvalidCookie "InvalidCookie Used only when the
> environment at the Producer has timed out AND the Producer needs the
> Consumer to invoke initCookie() again and resend data that may have
> been stored in sessions related to a cookie."
> 
> P77/Table,Row=InvalidSession "Used only when a Producer session has
> timed out AND the Producer needs the Consumer to invoke resend data
> that may have been cached in the session."
> 
> 
>