W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > December 2004

RE: i022: Relationship to the SOAP Binding Framework: a SOAP Request MEP and OneWay HTTP Binding

From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2004 13:59:10 -0800
Message-ID: <7DA77BF2392448449D094BCEF67569A50607B51C@RED-MSG-30.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "David Orchard" <dorchard@bea.com>, <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
How precisely would one use this MEP in the WSDL SOAP binding?
Specifically I'm wondering if there will ever be cases where it's not
clear whether to use this MEP or the existing SOAP Request-Response MEP.

 

________________________________

From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of David Orchard
Sent: Friday, December 17, 2004 2:06 PM
To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
Subject: i022: Relationship to the SOAP Binding Framework: a SOAP
Request MEP and OneWay HTTP Binding

 

I offer up the first new W3C SOAP MEP and Binding in many a moon...

 

I've written up a first draft of a proposed WS-Addressing Adjuncts with
a SOAP request MEP and a one-way SOAP HTTP Binding.  I believe this is
sufficient to close issue 22.  

 

I think it allows the soap request-response MEP to be layered on 2
one-way SOAP HTTP Bindings, but I haven't really verified it.  I've had
a few problems with the links, which I will work on once y'all have had
a chance to review.  I basically copied the soap 1.2 adjuncts MEP and
Binding section.

 

Some of the tricky areas that I thought I'd call out:

- There is an optional binding specific response in the one-way MEP.

- Relationship to media type.  I think this be covered by the soap
media-type, but I'm not 100% sure.  I'm not sure about the case of
whether a soap+xml is good enough for this mep+binding, I sure hope so
though.

- Webmethod support: I said POST only

- The identification of the mep in use can't be gleaned from the
information in the binding, unlike the SOAP HTTP Binding

- Streaming: I consistently said that requesting SOAP nodes must avoid
deadlock by accepting binding-specific response messages

- I removed "receiving" state from the next state tables.

- SOAP faults cannot come back over the http response.  For
request-response bound to 2 http requests, life sucks.

- The binding can allow an empty body, especially for cases where the
action is sufficient.

- I kept the HTTP status code at 200

 

I would also like to mention that I found this exercise very
informative.  I think that SOAP has provided an excellent framework for
creating interoperable meps and bindings as it forced me to think about
many hard issues.

 

Cheers,

Dave

 

 
Received on Thursday, 23 December 2004 21:59:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:00 GMT