W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-addressing@w3.org > June 2012

Re: WSA FaultTo Question

From: Jim Ma <mail2jimma@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2012 12:54:32 +0800
Message-ID: <CAAvMoHmMNROvpn0X6BVp09B_QKdKPaXrgXLVXZumf-XApT9DnQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
Thanks for the link, Doug.

On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 8:17 PM, Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com> wrote:

>
> If you look at:  http://ws-i.org/Profiles/BasicProfile-2.0-2010-11-09.html section 3.7.10, and in particular R1148, it might provide the guidance
> you're looking for.
>
> thanks
> -Doug
> ______________________________________________________
> STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
> (919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com
> The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog.
>
>
>  *Jim Ma <mail2jimma@gmail.com>*
>
> 06/12/2012 06:34 AM
>  Please respond to
> mail2jimma@gmail.com
>
>   To
> public-ws-addressing@w3.org
> cc
>   Subject
> WSA FaultTo Question
>
>
>
>
> Hi All,
> When I looked at a wsa faulto issue, I didn't find there is
> some specification conformance to address how to
> respond to the client when the fault occurred in the following ws
> invocation scenario:
>
> 1. A client sends a request to invoke a request/response operation from
> EndpointA, the request's wsa faultTo header point another endpointB
> and not the requester
>
> 2. There is error occurred during EndpointA processing the request, so
> the fault message is sent to EndpointB to notify the faultTo target
> endpointB which is specified in request wsa headers.
>
> 3. It's a two way webservice invocation , so we need to reply to the
> initial requester.
>
> So my question is what should the endpoint respond to client/requester? A
> 500
> error with the same fault message sent to faultTo endpoint or we need to
> forward the response from the faultTo target EndpointB  to requester ?
> Or EndpointA should
> mix this message and let the requester clearly know the exact soap fault
> message, and also if the fault message has successfully notified the
> endpointB ? Which option do you think
> it's the ideal way to handle this ? Is there any future specification
> will address this scenario ?
>
> Thanks in advance !
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>
Received on Thursday, 14 June 2012 04:55:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 14 June 2012 04:55:03 GMT