W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > January 2006

Re: New Issue: Complications due to wsaw:UsingAddressing and wsaw:Anonymous on endpoint [i069]

From: Mark Nottingham <mark.nottingham@bea.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:21:16 -0800
Message-Id: <0A8F1D0D-235E-4309-8923-6EAC015E210A@bea.com>
Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
To: Katy Warr <katy_warr@uk.ibm.com>
This is now i069;
   http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/wd-issues/#i069

On 2006-01-05, at 9:32 AM, Katy Warr wrote:

>
> The wsaw:UsingAddressing element can appear on the binding and the  
> endpoint (port)  of the wsdl.  Similarly, the associated  
> wsaw:anonymous element can appear on the binding or endpoint.
>
> Bearing this in mind, the following points require clarification in  
> the WSDL specification:
> 1. Is it acceptable to specify wsaw:Anonymous on the endpoint if  
> the corresponding wsaw:UsingAddressing is specified on the binding?
> 2. The spec indicates that it is not possible to specify  
> wsaw:UsingAddressing on the port if it is already specified on the  
> binding ("Alternatively, the wsaw:UsingAddressing element MAY be  
> instead included as a child on the wsdl20:endpoint (or  
> wsdl1.1:port)...").
> So if the binding does not specify WS-Addressing, it is possible to  
> override this at the endpoint.  However, there is no mechanism to  
> do the converse (i.e. to switch off the requirement for WS- 
> Addressing at the endpoint if it is defined at the binding).  Why  
> are we allowing one without the other?
>
> As an alternative (and faster ;o) ) resolution to this, I suggest  
> (as has already been suggested) that we remove the ability to  
> associated the wsaw:UsingAddressing and wsaw:Anonymous from the  
> endpoint altogether  **unless there is at least one compelling use  
> case for this**.   This would considerably simplify the  
> specification and remove unnecessary complication for  
> implementations.  (I don't believe that we fully appreciated the  
> repercussions of allowing these elements to be associated with the  
> port when this decision was first made.)  Note that in the rare  
> event that the wsaw:UsingAddressing element and its associated  
> wsaw:anonymous element need to be associated on a per port basis,  
> in order to reuse existing bindings, this can be done by creating a  
> binding for each of the different binding behaviours (exactly what  
> bindings are for anyhow...).
>
> Katy


--
Mark Nottingham   Principal Technologist
Office of the CTO   BEA Systems
Received on Friday, 13 January 2006 23:26:08 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:11 GMT