W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > July 2007

RE: Asynchronous calls

From: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 08:01:49 -0400
To: "GUILLON Benoit" <guillon@sungard-finance.fr>
Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org, public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF6DD3F379.8918B917-ON85257314.00415C78-85257314.0041ECF3@us.ibm.com>
Benoit,

I think you've pretty much answered your own question here. The answer is 
yes, but it really
means that you need to design the interface that way, using something such 
as eventing/notification
or possibly two (or more) oneway operations (in opposite directions) and 
have the whole
process mapped to BPEL.

Cheers,

Christopher Ferris
STSM, Software Group Standards Strategy
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/chrisferris
phone: +1 508 234 2986

public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org wrote on 07/10/2007 04:36:33 AM:

> Hi,
> 
> Thanks for your replies. I think I?d better be WS-A compliant if I 
> plan to use it - or drop it if my requirements keep the same.
> 
> There is still a little something that makes me dither: can I call 
> the ?reply-to? endpoint several times to notify client that the long
> operation has started, has generated a first result set and finally 
> has ended? Must these replies conform to the XSD schema of the 
> response type declared in my WSDL? It seems I?m touching WS-Eventing 
area ?
> 
> Benoit
> 
> 
> De : Rogers, Tony [mailto:Tony.Rogers@ca.com] 
> Envoyé : mardi 10 juillet 2007 00:19
> À : David Illsley; GUILLON Benoit
> Cc : public-ws-addressing@w3.org; public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
> Objet : RE: Asynchronous calls
> 
> To be a little pedantic, what you will get is an HTTP 202   *OR*   a
> fault - you will never get both; you should get exactly one. The 202
> is the response saying "got the message, working on it, I didn't see
> anything obviously wrong with it before I sent this 202 response" - 
> at that point you know it has read and interpreted some of the 
> headers at least.
> 
> Tony Rogers
> CA, Inc
> Senior Architect, Development
> tony.rogers@ca.com
> 
> 
> From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org on behalf of David Illsley
> Sent: Tue 10-Jul-07 5:57
> To: GUILLON Benoit
> Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org; public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Asynchronous calls
> 
> Hi,
> What you will get when using the WS-A implementations I'm aware of is an
> HTTP 202 indicating that the message was successfully received, and if
> there is a fault, the fault will be sent to the ReplyTo/FaultTo per WS-A
> Core. Anything over and above that in the direction you suggest isn't in
> any specification I'm aware of so you'd have to define that yourself and
> make your infrastructure support it (which isn't something I'd advise).
> David
> 
> David Illsley
> Web Services Development
> MP211, IBM Hursley Park, SO21 2JN
> +44 (0)1962 815049 (Int. 245049)
> david.illsley@uk.ibm.com
> 
> 
> 
> From:
> "GUILLON Benoit" <guillon@sungard-finance.fr>
> To:
> <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
> Date:
> 07/09/2007 01:58 PM
> Subject:
> Asynchronous calls
> 
> 
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I?m working on publishing long operations via WebServices: client sends 
a
> message via HTTP to my service which starts the long operation. Client
> gets the result later in a JMS queue or its own endpoint gets called 
with
> the response. To achieve this, I plan to use WS-Addressing for message
> correlation and reply-to endpoint definition.
> 
> However, I want my service to return a first reply saying ?Ok I managed 
to
> start the long operation (or not and why)? in the HTTP response of
> client?s call whatever the ?reply-to? field was.
> 
> I was wondering if this use-case was still compliant with WS-Addressing 
or
> if it was a bad use of ?reply-to?.
> 
> Best regards
> 
> Benoît Guillon * NTIC * SunGard * Asset Arena Investment Accounting * 7
> rue Royale, 173 Bureaux de la Colline, Bâtiment E, 92213 Saint-Cloud
> Cedex, France * Tel +33 1 49 11 31 87 * Fax +33 1 49 11 30 30 *
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 

> CONFIDENTIALITY: This email (including any attachments) may contain 
> confidential, proprietary and privileged information, and 
> unauthorized disclosure or use is prohibited. If you received this 
> email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email from 
> your system. Thank you 
> 
> 
> CONFIDENTIALITÉ: Ce courrier électronique (pièces jointes incluses) 
> peut contenir des informations confidentielles, propriétaires et 
> privilégiées, dont la divulgation ou l'utilisation non-autorisée est
> interdite. Si vous avez reçu ce courrier électronique par erreur, 
> nous vous remercions de bien vouloir avertir l'expéditeur et 
> détruire ce courrier électronique de votre système. Merci. 
Received on Tuesday, 10 July 2007 12:02:27 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:35:19 GMT