RE: operation name in responses?

Glen, 

thanks for the reply. I somehow didn't think of the correlation that was
necessary (but I'm kinda unsure here - is it really necessary?) in which
case it takes care of the rest of the messages regarding the operation
name.

Jacek

On Mon, 2004-02-23 at 17:06, Glen Daniels wrote:
> Hi Jacek: 
> 
> > I just thought - for the convenience of the service, we 
> > require that every operation carry the operation name on the 
> > wire (or other means of identifying the operation name). Does 
> > this apply to the response messages of request/response MEPs 
> > (the out message of in/out, that is); or in fact for all 
> > messages in any message exchange pattern? I think it should.
> > 
> > Whichever way it is, is the spec (or proposal, I don't know 
> > where we stand now) clear on this point?
> 
> It's a proposal at present, and no we don't specify that the name must
> be carried on any messages except the initial one.  I think that's the
> important one, and further messages which might correlate to that one
> already have implicit needs for somehow making the correlation work...
> once that's done the operation is obvious.  We do need to make clear, I
> think, that it's the initial message which is important, whether that be
> inbound or an outbound.
> 
> --Glen