W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > August 2005

Re: wsa:To -> SOAP1.2's ImmediateDestination

From: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 15:42:34 -0400
To: Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>
Cc: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, public-ws-addressing@w3.org, public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF1B380F83.89777E7E-ON85257062.006C1230-85257062.006C455B@us.ibm.com>

+1

Christopher Ferris
STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
blog: http://webpages.charter.net/chrisfer/blog.html
phone: +1 508 377 9295

public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org wrote on 08/19/2005 03:32:26 PM:

> On Aug 19, 2005, at 11:10 AM, Mark Baker wrote:
> >>>
> >> wsa:To gives the value of the ultimate recipient, but the SOAP
> >> binding is hop-by-hop so ImmediateDestination could be the address of
> >> a SOAP intermediary instead of the ultimate recipient.
> >
> > Sorry, I don't follow.  I don't know what it means for the WS-A SOAP
> > binding to be hop-by-hop, since the SOAP processing model is end-to- 
> > end.
> >
> See the SOAP 1.2 Rec[1]:
> 
> <quote>
> The SOAP Processing Model enables SOAP nodes that include the 
> mechanisms necessary to implement one or more features to express 
> such features within the SOAP envelope as SOAP header blocks (see 2.4 
> Understanding SOAP Header Blocks). Such header blocks can be intended 
> for any SOAP node or nodes along a SOAP message path (see 2.3 
> Targeting SOAP Header Blocks). The combined syntax and semantics of 
> SOAP header blocks are known as a SOAP module, and are specified 
> according to the rules in 3.3 SOAP Modules.
> 
> 
> 
> In contrast, a SOAP protocol binding operates between two adjacent 
> SOAP nodes along a SOAP message path. There is no requirement that 
> the same underlying protocol is used for all hops along a SOAP 
> message path...
> 
> 
> 
> Certain features might require end-to-end as opposed to hop-by-hop 
> processing semantics. Although the SOAP Protocol Binding Framework 
> allows end-to-end features to be expressed outside the SOAP envelope, 
> no standard mechanism is provided for the processing by 
> intermediaries of the resulting messages...
> 
> </quote>
> > Also, in the Req/Resp MEP, there's some ambiguity about the
> > definition of the ImmediateDestination property;
> >
> > "The identifier of the immediate destination of an outbound message."
> >  -- http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-soap12-part2-20030624/ 
> > #tabreqresprops
> >
> > (where "immediate destination" is undefined)
> >
> > However, the description of its value seems unambiguous that it's
> > identifying the ultimate recipient;
> >
> > "An identifier (URI) that denotes the responding SOAP node"
> >  -- http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-soap12-part2-20030624/#tabreqcon
> >
> Yes, but from a hop-by-hop binding perspective, the next node along 
> the SOAP message path is the responder, its not necessarily the 
> ultimate recipient (though it would be for the penultimate node).
> 
> Marc.
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-soap12-part1-20030624/#soapfeature
> 
> ---
> Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com>
> Business Alliances, CTO Office, Sun Microsystems.
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 19 August 2005 19:42:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:08 GMT