W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > March 2002

Re: Draft Resolution for Issue 41

From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 16:31:22 +0100
Message-ID: <3C8E1F4A.617FA784@crf.canon.fr>
To: Jacek Kopecky <jacek@systinet.com>
CC: amr.f.yassin@philips.com, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Remember that the sending application may not be aware of any intermediaries, at
least not of all of them; for example my ISP may have a securing intermediary
that I am not aware of. Unfortunately, I don't think the current wording
addresses this issue.

Jean-Jacques.

Jacek Kopecky wrote:

>  Amr,
>  I'm afraid the text you quote does not address the issue. I
> think the proposal should rather be to say:
>  "While the target URI is not normatively in the envelope, if an
> application uses intermediaries, it must configure somehow
> (either statically or using dynamic routing protocol) the message
> path. Part of this configuration is the successive target URIs.
> Therefore it is the responsibility of the application designer to
> provide the appropriate target URIs at the appropriate points of
> the message path, or of a routing extension, not of the SOAP
> core."
>  What'dya think? 8-)
>
>                    Jacek Kopecky
>
>                    Senior Architect, Systinet (formerly Idoox)
>                    http://www.systinet.com/
>
> On Thu, 7 Mar 2002 amr.f.yassin@philips.com wrote:
>
>  > Hi,
>  >
>  > I was assigned to write down a proposal to resolve issue 41.
>  >
>  > <Issue_41>
>  > The target (program, service or object) URI (TBD) is not mentioned in any
>  > normative way in the SOAP envelope. While this does not conflict with the
>  > requirements, I believe it's an important (and possibly debatable)
>  > decision. This decision precludes sending an RPC invocation through an
>  > intermediary that uses different protocol bindings for sending and
>  > receiving XP messages. [1]
>  > </Issue_41>
>  >
>  > Proposal:
>  >
>  > I propose to close this issue since it was addressed in Part 1 section 2.1
>  > and 2.2
>  >
>  > <Sec_2.1>
>  > A SOAP node can be the initial SOAP sender, the ultimate SOAP receiver, or
>  > a SOAP intermediary, in which case it is both a SOAP sender and a SOAP
>  > receiver.
>  > ...
>  > A SOAP node MUST be identified by a URI
>  > </Sec_2.1>
>  >
>  >
>  > <Sec_2.2>
>  > In processing a SOAP message, a SOAP node is said to act in one or more
>  > SOAP roles, each of which is identified by a URI known as the SOAP role
>  > name.
>  > </Sec_2.2>
>  >
>  >
>  > ________________________________________
>  > Amr Yassin      <amr.f.yassin@philips.com>
>  > Research Member
>  >
Received on Tuesday, 12 March 2002 10:33:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:09 GMT