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

RE: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for other messages?

From: Yalcinalp, Umit <umit.yalcinalp@sap.com>
Date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 19:57:57 +0200
Message-ID: <2BA6015847F82645A9BB31C7F9D6416510665A@uspale20.pal.sap.corp>
To: "Jonathan Marsh" <jmarsh@microsoft.com>, <tom@coastin.com>
Cc: "David Hull" <dmh@tibco.com>, <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jonathan Marsh [mailto:jmarsh@microsoft.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, Jun 14, 2005 10:40 AM
> To: tom@coastin.com; Yalcinalp, Umit
> Cc: David Hull; public-ws-addressing@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Why is [message id] required for requests but 
> not for other messages?
> 
> If the draft minutes are accurate, some of us voted to make 
> [message ID]
> mandatory, others to make it optional at all times, but the 
> bulk of the
> WG voted to simply 86 issue lc86.  I don't know what more to
> productively say on the topic at this point.

I agree. In fact, that is exactly what I was trying to point out by my
reply to David. We, at SAP, argued for making message ids mandatory. 

It seems to me that we are rehashing the same thing again which we made
a decision on. Lets move on. 

Cheers, 

--umit

> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-
> > addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Tom Rutt
> > Sent: Monday, June 13, 2005 4:21 PM
> > To: Yalcinalp, Umit
> > Cc: David Hull; public-ws-addressing@w3.org
> > Subject: Re: Why is [message id] required for requests but not for
> > other messages?
> > 
> > 
> > check my concern below umit's comment
> > 
> > Yalcinalp, Umit wrote:
> > 
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >>-----Original Message-----
> > >>From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
> > >>[mailto:public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of 
> David Hull
> > >>Sent: Monday, Jun 13, 2005 3:07 PM
> > >>To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
> > >>Subject: Why is [message id] required for requests but not
> > >>for other messages?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>If [message id] is to be leveraged for uses other than 
> correlation,
> > >>particularly duplicate elimination and security, wouldn't those
> > >>considerations apply at least equally well to non request/reply
> > >>interactions?  If not, what is the basis for requiring
> > >>[message id] for
> > >>requests but not for other types of message?
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >Well, if you recall from the f2f, we wanted to require message id
> > across
> > >the board :-)
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > but those semantics are not there in the present document, 
> MesssageId
> > is
> > only required when correlation of a reply is required.
> > 
> > Tom Rutt
> > 
> > >--umit
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > 
> > --
> > ----------------------------------------------------
> > Tom Rutt	email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com
> > Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 14 June 2005 17:58:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:05 GMT