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.


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 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:29 UTC