- From: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
- Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 23:40:30 -0500
- To: Rich Salz <rsalz@datapower.com>
- Cc: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Rich Salz wrote: >> As far as I can tell, what we have, or at least what we want to have >> if we take this approach is SOAP-independent request-response. That >> is, something always goes out, something /always/ comes back, but >> neither message need be a SOAP envelope. The optionality is in the >> SOAPiness, not in the existence of a response. > > > That rules out true fire and forget, such as SOAP over UDP, right? That's a different MEP. If your transport gives you request-response natively, you use "request-response with optional SOAPiness". If it gives you true fire and forget, you use "fire-and-forget one-way" (TBD). > > /r$ >
Received on Monday, 9 January 2006 04:41:57 UTC