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

RE: NEW ISSUE: Handling arbitrary sets of associated endpoints

From: Rogers, Tony <Tony.Rogers@ca.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 08:04:47 +1100
Message-ID: <7997F38251504E43B38435DAF917887F40C3B1@ausyms23.ca.com>
To: "Rich Salz" <rsalz@datapower.com>, "David Hull" <dmh@tibco.com>
Cc: <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
My first reaction was "of course they do!". My second reaction was "er, hang on a second...".
 
You have a gift for asking awkward questions :-)
 
Yes, I believe there is a place for SOAP Faults in multi-message MEPs (don't say that with a mouth full of cereal). The Fault is conveying an indication that something did not proceed according to plan. It is often treated differently by intermediaries.
 
Tony

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org on behalf of Rich Salz 
	Sent: Sat 12-Mar-05 6:27 
	To: David Hull 
	Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org 
	Subject: Re: NEW ISSUE: Handling arbitrary sets of associated endpoints
	
	


	You edge up to an interesting question:
	        Do SOAP Faults make sense in other than request/response?
	
	
	--
	Rich Salz, Chief Security Architect
	DataPower Technology                           http://www.datapower.com
	XS40 XML Security Gateway   http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html
	
	
	
Received on Friday, 11 March 2005 21:05:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:04 GMT