W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > October 2001

RE: Issue 140 bogus?

From: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Oct 2001 23:20:29 -0400
To: Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com
Cc: "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>, jacek@idoox.com, skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF822B6677.CDCF3D3B-ON85256AE1.0011BB00@raleigh.ibm.com >
I've never read any version of the spec to mean that
         A -> B -> ANON -> C -> ANON -> D
is not possible because ANY node can process ANY block.
Yes certain headers (and the body) are targeted but
the processing model does not preclude a SOAP node
from processing blocks that are not targeted for it.
So while conceptually the above scenario might look
strange, in reality I believe it will happen.  Take
the example you gave a note earlier this evening,
an encryption intermediary, if the sender has no
notion of what SOAP nodes the message is going
through, the SOAP envelope might look like:
 <env>
    <header>encryption data</header>
    <body>...</body>
 </env>
and if the message goes through a decryption
intermediary it will pick-off and process the
untargeted (or should I say anon-targeted)
header and process it.  Thus giving us 2 SOAP
nodes that will in essence be the anon actor
(the intermediary and the ultimate destination).

-Dug


Noah_Mendelsohn@lotus.com@w3.org on 10/09/2001 09:04:49 PM

Sent by:  xml-dist-app-request@w3.org


To:   "Henrik Frystyk Nielsen" <henrikn@microsoft.com>
cc:   jacek@idoox.com, skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Subject:  RE: Issue 140 bogus?



Henrik Frystyk Nielsen writes:

>> I would prefer to be formal
>> about saying *what* it means
>> to act in the role of the anonymous actor,
>> rather than *how* that can be accomplished

The question, I think, is what can you say about the message path.  Is it
possible that it extends beyond the node assuming the anonymous role?  Is
it possible that a path like this would emerge:

        A -> B -> ANON -> C -> ANON -> D

SOAP 1.1 sure seems to rule that out. It says:

"Omitting the SOAP actor attribute indicates that the recipient is the
ultimate destination of the SOAP message."

I think that pretty formally boils down to "the message path ends at the
node assuming the anonymous role.  There can be no node further along the
message path, and there can therefore be no more than one node assuming
the anonymous role."  I don't think that's unduly telling the node how to
do its job.


------------------------------------------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn                                    Voice: 1-617-693-4036
Lotus Development Corp.                            Fax: 1-617-693-8676
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 9 October 2001 23:21:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:04 GMT