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

Re: Requirements for one-way MEP

From: Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2005 16:16:25 -0700
Message-ID: <42B89FC9.5060501@oracle.com>
To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org

Speaking for myself, there are two things (related to async and use of 
ws-addressing) that I would like to get clarification on from XMLP 
(these things have come up before on the XMLP/WSDL/async-TF list). These 
two things, I don't think is "new work" but clarification on the 
existing SOAP-HTTP binding.

1) Does the SOAP/HTTP binding require that a SOAP envelope be sent back 
in the HTTP-response (for the non-failure case). See [1].

2) Can 303 status code be used for pull-based async req-response using 
the existing SOAP/HTTP binding. See thread starting at [2].

Thx.

-Anish
--

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2004Nov/0005.html
[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-dist-app/2004Nov/0005.html


Mark Nottingham wrote:
> 
> Mike: I'll ask on next week's telecon.
> 
> Addressing WG: Please see below WRT WSDL's request to start a one-way  
> MEP; we'll discuss whether we have anything to add next week (Reply- To 
> set to the Addressing list to keep the cross-chatter down).
> 
> Regards,
> 
> 
> On Jun 21, 2005, at 10:35 AM, <michael.mahan@nokia.com>  
> <michael.mahan@nokia.com> wrote:
> 
>> Thanks Glen,
>>
>> Mark, does WS-Addressing have any additional requirements or scoping
>> statements to this?
>>
>> Thx,
>> Mike
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: www-ws-cg-request@w3.org [mailto:www-ws-cg-request@w3.org]On
>> Behalf Of ext Glen Daniels
>> Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 1:38 PM
>> To: www-ws-cg@w3.org
>> Cc: www-ws-desc@w3.org; public-ws-async-tf@w3.org
>> Subject: Requirements for one-way MEP
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Greetings, CG:
>>
>> As Jonathan mentioned in [1], the WS-Description group have requested
>> the specification of a one-way SOAP MEP.  I believe the deliverables
>> here are as follows:
>>
>> * A SOAP one-way MEP, which describes a simple "fire and forget"
>> single-message pattern, with an appropriate URI and specification  as per
>> the SOAP 1.2 binding framework.
>>
>> * A binding of this MEP to HTTP.  This may involve changing the  existing
>> HTTP binding, or may involve generating a new one.
>>
>> * A clear description of how each party (sender and receiver)  determines
>> which MEP is in use.
>>
>> The requirements for this are pretty much spelled out above, except  for
>> one more (fairly light/intangible one) that I would add:
>>
>> * Should if possible take into account the WS-I work in this area.
>>
>> I thought there might be more to it, but I think that's about it!  If
>> anyone from WSDL/async thinks there are more requirements, please  chime
>> in.
>>
>> --Glen
>>
>> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-cg/2005Jun/0000.html
>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> -- 
> Mark Nottingham   Principal Technologist
> Office of the CTO   BEA Systems
> 
> 
Received on Tuesday, 21 June 2005 23:16:28 GMT

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