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

Re: WS-A Issue 28 - Multiple ports

From: Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Nov 2004 08:07:49 -0800
Message-ID: <41923CD5.40003@coastin.com>
To: Brinild <brinild@yahoo.com>
CC: public-ws-addressing@w3.org

With respect to CORBA IOR, often times the object key portion (somewhat 
analogous to ref props) is the same for each
of the indivudual protocol profiles.   IN corba IOR , for such cases, 
the object key must be repeated in the profile for each
access protocol.  

Through the years, people have complained about this, asking for some 
syntax which would have a default object key which
could be overidden, if needed, in one or more of the profiles in that IOR.

Tom Rutt

Brinild wrote:

>Can see that reasoning.  That's why I wanted to see
>Steve's write-up.  Would you say the same logic
>applies to reference parameters?  My reading of an EPR
>is that the entire EPR (address and reference
>properties/parameters) go together. So my
>interpretation was that if someone had a new <address>
>they may need new reference properties/parameters;
>especially if those properties/parameters influenced
>how the transport specific processing is done to (from
>the spec) "properly dispatch messages" on the
>receiving end.
>
>But like you said: At least that's the way I look at
>it.   :-]
>
>--- Sanjiva Weerawarana <sanjiva@watson.ibm.com>
>wrote:
>
>  
>
>>The ref props are *not* address specific! Only the
>>actual address would
>>be:
>>
>><EndpointReference>
>>  
>>
>>    
>>
><Address>logical-address-or-"default"-binding-address</Address>
>  
>
>>   <ReferenceProperties> .. </ReferenceProperties>
>>   <Policy>
>>      assertions giving alternate binding details
>>(address)
>>   </Policy>
>></EndpointReference>
>>
>>If the ref props are binding specific then we're
>>talking about different
>>service interactions not about the same "thing" with
>>multiple alternative
>>access paths.
>>
>>At least that's the way I look at it.
>>
>>Sanjiva.
>>  ----- Original Message ----- 
>>  From: brinild 
>>  To: Vinoski, Stephen 
>>  Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org 
>>  Sent: Tuesday, November 09, 2004 7:23 AM
>>
>>
>>  Steve - could you give an example of what one of
>>these Multiple Port EPRs might look like?  I'm
>>wondering how the reference properties would be
>>grouped since they may be address specific.
>>
>>  "Vinoski, Stephen" <Steve.Vinoski@iona.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>    My apologies for being unclear. My answer had
>>two parts: one about the target of a message, and
>>the other about messages sent to a particular target
>>where the messages contain addressing information
>>about other (third party) services.
>>
>>    1. For the target, there's no requirement to
>>always send the whole multi-address EPR with each
>>message. This is because the target normally already
>>knows the addresses by which it's reachable. There
>>are cases, however, such as with routers that switch
>>messages from one protocol/transport/format to
>>another, that is made possible only by sending the
>>whole multi-address EPR for the target. So sending
>>the whole target EPR needn't be mandatory, but it
>>should be allowed.
>>
>>    2. If you want to send an EPR for a third party
>>service as part of a message to a target service,
>>e.g., send a callback EPR to some event service to
>>register for fut! ure notifications, then you need
>>to send the whole EPR for the third party.
>>
>>    Hopefully that's clearer.
>>
>>    --steve
>>
>>    -----Original Message-----
>>    From: Rich Salz [mailto:rsalz@datapower.com]
>>    Sent: Saturday, November 06, 2004 11:25 PM
>>    To: Vinoski, Stephen
>>    Cc: Sanjiva Weerawarana;
>>public-ws-addressing@w3.org
>>    Subject: RE: WS-A Issue 28 - Multiple ports
>>needed in an EPR
>>
>>
>>    > Sanjiva is right. (I already answered this the
>>previous time you asked
>>    > it, Rich; see [1].)
>>
>>    I couldn't make sense of your answer.
>>
>>    Thanks.
>>
>>    -- 
>>    Rich Salz Chief Security Architect
>>    DataPower Technology http://www.datapower.com
>>    XS40 XML Security Gateway
>>http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html
>>    XML Security Overview
>>http://www.datapower.com/xmldev/xmlsecurity.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  -B 
>>
>>  Brinild@yahoo.com
>>  http://brinild.blogspot.com
>>
>>
>>
>>    
>>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>  
>
>>  Do you Yahoo!?
>>  Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. www.yahoo.com
>>    
>>
>
>
>=====
>Brinild@yahoo.com
>http://brinild.blogspot.com
>
>
>		
>__________________________________ 
>Do you Yahoo!? 
>Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page. 
>www.yahoo.com 
> 
>
>  
>

-- 
----------------------------------------------------
Tom Rutt	email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com
Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133
Received on Wednesday, 10 November 2004 16:10:34 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:34:59 GMT