W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xml-dist-app@w3.org > January 2006

RE: The deep difference between request/response and fire-and-forget

From: Rich Salz <rsalz@datapower.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 22:48:44 -0500 (EST)
To: David Orchard <dorchard@bea.com>
cc: "xml-dist-app@w3.org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44L0.0601262240560.11209-100000@smtp.datapower.com>

> I would think that consuming the response is the opposite of "forget".
> Consuming the response is effectively not fire and forget.  Isn't that
> the key difference between req/resp and f-a-f?

Layering.  From the point of view of a SOAP application, it sends a SOAP
message and gets nothing back, seems like f-a-f to me.

It's exactly like TCP.  Suppose a "client" connects to a server, sends
data, and then closes the connection -- and the "server" sends nothing.
You'd consider this a one-way data flow, and ignore the fact that the
TCP implementation underneath is shipping packets in both directions.

The MEP is for the developer using SOAP, not the implementor.

        /r$

-- 
SOA Appliance Group
IBM Application Integration Middleware
* This address is going away; please use rsalz@us.ibm.com *
Received on Friday, 27 January 2006 03:48:51 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:21 GMT