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

RE: EPR to UDDI Mapping

From: Harris Reynolds <hreynolds@webmethods.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 09:05:32 -0800
Message-ID: <5B10E50E14A4594EB1B5566B69AD940706B5C72B@maileast>
To: "'Vinoski, Stephen'" <Steve.Vinoski@iona.com>, Harris Reynolds <hreynolds@webmethods.com>, vikasd@yahoo.com, public-ws-addressing@w3.org

Steve,

Although I think ERPs will often be transitory, I agree that this is not
always the case.  My understanding is that when reference properties are
involved (for example in the stateful interaction use cases mentioned in
DavidO's proposed solution of issue #1) those reference properties could
easily change for different interactions.  This would also be true in a
truly asynchronous call as well where the ReplyTo could change at any time.

Where ERPs would be static and more resistant to change is the case where it
only contains a URI that is the network address.  In these cases I would
agree that they wouldn't change (hopefully) and users may want to store them
in some way (either using UDDI or some proprietary mechanism).

In short I agree that we don't want to limit EPRs to dynamic cases, although
I think that often times they will be used in that kind of environment.


Harris Reynolds
webMethods, Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Vinoski, Stephen
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 8:49 PM
To: Harris Reynolds; vikasd@yahoo.com; public-ws-addressing@w3.org
Subject: RE: EPR to UDDI Mapping


I'm not sure why an EPR would have to be limited to being used only in
transitory cases. If it's limited in that way, IMO it just means that
something
else quite like an EPR will need to be devised for the non-transitory cases.
That seems like a mistake.

--steve

-----Original Message-----
From: Harris Reynolds [mailto:hreynolds@webmethods.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 1:15 PM
To: 'vikasd@yahoo.com'; public-ws-addressing@w3.org
Subject: RE: EPR to UDDI Mapping



There isn't currently a mapping from WSA to UDDI, although I am not sure
that one will be needed.  A lot of times an EPR will be part of an
interaction.  Node A sends B a message and includes a ReplyTo EPR specifying
where a response should be sent.

I am still not convinced that EPR are intended to be "stored" in the same
way that services are saved to a UDDI Registry.  EPRs seem to be more
transitory in nature.

The discussion on physical vs. logical addresses is interesting in this
context.  From my perspective the physical address (transport specific
location) should be stored, but the logical address (the ERP) likely will
not need to be.

It will be interesting to see what happens in practice in this area.  As a
working group we will have a lot of educating to do to ensure the
specification is used as designed.


Harris Reynolds
webMethods, Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Vikas Deolaliker
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2005 12:24 PM
To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
Cc: vikasd@yahoo.com
Subject: EPR to UDDI Mapping


Is their a specification that show how a service can discover an existing
EPR? Is their a UDDI binding defined for WSA-Core? 

In general, how can one discover/search for an EPR without an hallway
conversation? 

Thanks 

Vikas 
Received on Thursday, 20 January 2005 17:05:54 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:01 GMT