W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ws-policy@w3.org > September 2006

Re: Issue 3619 - input from WS-Addressing WG

From: Fabian Ritzmann <Fabian.Ritzmann@Sun.COM>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 11:28:31 +0300
To: Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com>
Cc: Sergey Beryozkin <sergey.beryozkin@iona.com>, Paul Cotton <paul.cotton@microsoft.com>, public-ws-policy@w3.org, Maryann Hondo <mhondo@us.ibm.com>, Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>, Bob Freund-Hitachi <bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>
Message-id: <4507C12F.1000905@Sun.COM>

Asir Vedamuthu wrote:
>> A policy externally attached to it takes precedence
>> over policies which can be directly or indirectly 
>> attached inside an EPR itself.
> 
> Yes. My read is - policies contained within a policy subject (say an EPR
> or another policy subject) aren't in-scope with respect to an external
> policy attachment.

I'm struggling with the wording in WS-PolAt section 3.4. Can you point 
me to where exactly it says that?

>> If it takes precedence over Endpoint Policy 
>> Subject's policies then does it take precedence 
>> over policies which can be associated with it 
>> through wsdl:portType and wsdl:binding as well ?
> 
> The WSDL port, binding and portType elements are attachment points and
> collectively represent the ---endpoint policy subject---.

Does that make sense? Why not merge the EPR policy with the policies in 
the endpoint scope of the WSDL?

> It is important to note that the example in Section 3.4
> (WS-PolicyAttachment) is fictitious and illustrative.

We just need to make sure the external attachment semantics are clearly 
defined.

Fabian


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com] 
> Sent: Friday, September 08, 2006 9:27 AM
> To: Asir Vedamuthu; Paul Cotton; public-ws-policy@w3.org
> Cc: Maryann Hondo; Marc Hadley; Bob Freund-Hitachi
> Subject: Re: Issue 3619 - input from WS-Addressing WG
> 
> Hi
> 
> Can you please clarify one more thing :
> 
> Lets take EPR just as an example. EPR being a domain expression,
> identifies an Endpoint Policy Subject. A policy externally attached 
> to it takes precedence over policies which can be directly or indirectly
> attached inside an EPR itself.
> 
> Does it take precedence over policies which apply to an Endpoint Policy
> Subject only or over all policies which can be associated 
> with all various WSDL subjects ?
> 
> If it takes precedence over Endpoint Policy Subject's policies then does
> it take precedence over policies which can be associated 
> with it through wsdl:portType and wsdl:binding as well ? Or just over a
> policy which can be associated with wsdl:port ? That is, 
> will this externally attached policy be used as a single source for
> calculating an effective policy for a referenced Endpoint Policy 
> Subject or not ?
> 
> Would it make sence to open an issue so that a possibel clarification be
> added to section 3.4 ?
> 
> Thanks, Sergey
> 
> 
> 
>> Asir, can you please confirm this would be equivalent to
>> what you said in another email in this thread [1] ?
> 
> Yes - our interpretations are the same.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Asir S Vedamuthu
> Microsoft Corporation
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:sergey.beryozkin@iona.com]
> Sent: Friday, September 01, 2006 3:39 AM
> To: Sergey Beryozkin; Paul Cotton; public-ws-policy@w3.org
> Cc: Maryann Hondo; Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM; Bob Freund-Hitachi; Asir
> Vedamuthu
> Subject: Re: Issue 3619 - input from WS-Addressing WG
> 
> My apologies, I haven't read Section 3.4 carefully enough and jumped to
> the example straight away.
> The text clearly states (at least this is how I read it now) is that a
> policy which is applied to a subject inside wsp:AppliesTo
> takes precedence over any policies contained inside of the wsp:AppliesTo
> element such as EPR.
> Asir, can you please confirm this would be equivalent to what you said
> in another email in this thread [1] ?
> 
> That is, can I conclude that  a policy which is applied to an EPR (using
> EPR as an example) inside wsp:AppliesTo overrides/takes
> precedence over an embedded wsp:Policy (directly or in an
> embedded or referenced WSDL) and hence no policies reconciliation is
> required ?
> 
> Thanks,
> Sergey Beryozkin
> Iona Technologies
> 
> [1]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-policy/2006Sep/0000.html
> 
>> Hi
>>
>> The reconciliation with embedded/referenced WSDLs should happen
> irrespectively of whether a policy is attached to EPR through an
>> embedded wsp:Policy or through a WS-Policy Attachment mechanism (as
> shown in the example in Section 3.4).
>> What is the algorithm for reconciling an embedded wsp:Policy with the
> WSDLs ? The same algorithm should be applied to a WS-Policy
>> Attachment example.
>> If both EPR-embedded (wsp:Policy) and wsp:PolicyAttachment-attached
> policies are available at the same time then one of then
>> should take precedence and then the chosen policy should be reconciled
> with WSDLs.
>> As a side question : why would someone have a policy attached
> to/embedded in EPR anyway ? What is the advantage of doing it (and
>> hence requiring a policy consumer to go through a reconcilation
> process) instead of attaching it directly to a policy subject
>> inside a corresponding WSDL definition ?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Sergey Beryozkin
>> Iona Technologies
>>
Received on Wednesday, 13 September 2006 08:28:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:20:41 GMT