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

One-way MEP text proposals

From: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 13:35:14 -0500
To: "xml-dist-app@w3.org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
Message-id: <442AD362.7090105@tibco.com>
As per my action item from today's meeting, here are two previous
attempts at defining a one-way SOAP MEP.  Dave Orchard's [1] dates to
December 2004.  It came out of the context of adapting protocols like
HTTP to one-way use.  As such, it includes a sample HTTP binding.   We
now handle the cases this was aimed at with the SOAP 1.1/HTTP note in
WSA and the soon-to-be-put-to-bed request-optional-response SOAP 1.2 MEP
(both of which owe much to [1]). 

Mine (attached as HTML) came along later, just over a year ago.  It was
intended as a pure one-way MEP.  I believe it's more appropriate to the
problem we're solving now.  In particular

    * It defines the one way MEP as consisting of "exactly one SOAP
      message" as opposed to "one SOAP message and one optional binding
      specific message"
    * It defines a state machine with three states (init, success and
      fail) for the sender and receiver, as opposed to five (init,
      requesting/receiving, sending+receiving/receiving+sending,
      success, fail).
    * It does not define an OutboundMessage property (only InboundMessage).
    * It defines ImmediateDestination but not ImmediateSender.  The
      receiver of a message will not generally have the sender's
      identity available.  If ImmediateSender is defined, it should be
    * It "makes no claims about the disposition or handling of SOAP
      faults generated by the either SOAP node" as opposed to having
      faults generated while the receiver is "Receiving" made available
      in the OutboundMessage property.

I'm sure this will have to be tweaked to meet our needs, but it seems
like a better starting point, as it is aimed more directly at the "pure
one-way" case.


Received on Wednesday, 29 March 2006 18:35:30 UTC

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