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

Re: Action Item

From: John Kemp <john.kemp@nokia.com>
Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2005 18:03:51 -0500
Message-ID: <4394C757.5080302@nokia.com>
To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org

Hash: SHA1

ext John Kemp wrote:
> I would note that in the reverse HTTP case, where a SOAP message not
> related to the initial request message may be sent, and the initial
> request is processed asynchronously, the SOAP envelope would contain an
> actual SOAP message. Is it possible to include a "full" SOAP message in
> a 202 response?

Answering my own question, it seems that it *is* feasible to return an
HTTP 202 containing an actual SOAP message. In which case, I'd like to
add my support for not requiring an empty SOAP envelope in the HTTP

- - JohnK

> - JohnK
> ext Marc Hadley wrote:
>>>+1, I don't like the requirement to include an empty SOAP envelope in 
>>>the 202 reply and note that this is contrary to the WS-I recommendation.
>>>On Dec 5, 2005, at 3:11 PM, Anish Karmarkar wrote:
>>>>One comment below.
>>>>Yalcinalp, Umit wrote:
>>>>> *3.1.2 SOAP 1.1/HTTP Extension Semantics by using 
>>>>>wsaw:UsingAddressing element:*
>>>>> The presence of the wsaw:UsingAddressing element in the binding  or
>>>>>endpoint (port) components of the endpoint description extends  the
>>>>>semantics of the SOAP 1.1/HTTP binding. In the case of the  WSDL
>>>>>SOAP/HTTP synchronous binding for request-response  operations, the
>>>>>presence of the wsaw:UsingAddressing element  changes the requirement
>>>>>that the response message be sent over the  same HTTP channel over
>>>>>which the request was received. Further,  the presence of the
>>>>>wsaw:Anonymous element may specify how  anonymous addresses are
>>>>>treated specific to an operation defined  in a binding.  Therefore,
>>>>>the wsa:replyTo header in the request  MAY contain an address with a
>>>>>value different from the anonymous  URI when wsaw:UsingAddressing
>>>>>marker is used by extending the  semantics of SOAP1.1/HTTP binding.
>>>>> Usage of wsaw:UsingAddressing element indicates that SOAP1.1/HTTP 
>>>>>binding is allowed to use a separate connection for sending  response
>>>>>messages, instead of using the same HTTP connection. This  extension
>>>>>allows SOAP 1.1/HTTP to be used asynchronously. Hence,  the response
>>>>>message MAY be sent over the same HTTP channel over  which the
>>>>>request was received or by opening a separate  connection, depending
>>>>>on the following conditions:
>>>>>         When the value of the [reply endpoint] in the request 
>>>>>message contains the anonymous URI as its address, the response  MUST
>>>>>be sent over the same HTTP channel.          When the value  of
>>>>>[reply endpoint] contains an address that is different than the 
>>>>>anonymous URI, this extension requires that
>>>>>o       The receipt of the request message MUST be acknowledged  with
>>>>>a status message (202) by the receiver using the HTTP  connection
>>>>>that generated the request. The receipt message MUST  contain an
>>>>>empty SOAP envelope. / (Lets discuss this further)/
>>>>Why is the empty SOAP Envelope required?
>>>>Does empty SOAP envelope mean: no SOAP headers and an empty body?
>>>>What seems strange about the empty SOAP envelope is that:
>>>>The MEP (or transmission primitive) says that the exchange is req- res
>>>>and the requester gets back 2 soap messages (one "empty"  envelope
>>>>sent on the HTTP back channel and the other "real" reply  on the
>>>>ReplyTo EPR). Where is the empty envelope processed? Is it  delivered
>>>>to the App?
>>>>>o       The actual response MUST be sent using a separate  connection
>>>>>using the address value of the response message  specified by [reply
>>>>> The wsaw:Anonymous element specifies the following semantics for  a
>>>>>specific operation in SOAP1.1/HTTP:
>>>>>          optional value indicates the same semantics that is 
>>>>>defined for wsaw:UsingAddressing above, namely anonymous URIs are 
>>>>>allowed, but not required.
>>>>>         required value indicates that the response message be 
>>>>>sent over the same HTTP channel over which the request was  received.
>>>>>In essence, it indicates requirement for always using  synchronous
>>>>>         prohibited value indicates that SOAP1.1/HTTP binding 
>>>>>must always use a separate connection for sending response  messages,
>>>>>instead of using the same HTTP connection. In essence,  it indicates
>>>>>requirement for always using asynchronous responses.
>>>>> /Note: We may consider including a paragraph here as a note to 
>>>>>indicate that SOAP processing rules dictate how responses/errors  are
>>>>>generated and sent to appropriate destinations depending on  when the
>>>>>extensions are processed and engaged following the  discussion in the
>>>>>wg. **/
>>>>>* *
>>>Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com>
>>>Business Alliances, CTO Office, Sun Microsystems.
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

Received on Monday, 5 December 2005 23:04:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:04:12 UTC