- From: Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 11:06:05 -0800
- To: "Srinivas, Davanum M" <Davanum.Srinivas@ca.com>
- CC: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
Dims, How does this proposal deal with the problem that for certain SOAP header block definitions having multiple instances of the same header may be undefined/illegal/counterproductive? Specifically, a consumer's local policy may require it to include a certain header block of type A (with some well defined semantics). Another instance of A may also be included as a refp. The opacity of the refps prevent the consumer from making any decision regarding header block A. Furthermore, it is possible that different part of the system/stack may deal with the policy to include header block of type A and WS-Addressing. For example, a JAX-RPC handler chain. Thx. -Anish -- Srinivas, Davanum M wrote: > *Team,* > Here's the re-worked proposal…dropping the <wsa:RefPs> element as per > Jonathan [1] > > > *Title: Marking RefProps/RefParams using attributes* > > Description: As mentioned in several threads, currently there is no way > to distinguish between regular soap headers and RefProps and RefParams > just by looking at the soap message on the wire. One could use xml > attributes to add extra information on soap headers which have been > added ONLY because they were part of the original EPR. This is basically > to be in tune with the "Self-description" mantra. > > Justification: Different types of intermediaries can use this > information for various purposes (say caching, monitoring, > logging/auditing, discovery). For example a transparent (does not > generate EPR's and is not an endpoint for soap messages) intermediary > will be able to track all Refp's flowing in the system without a user > having to input all QName's being used in the system or use some other > out of band mechanism. Another benefit is that one can even use the same > QName in both RefParams and RefProps IF we are able to mark them in some > fashion and we will be able to apply different policies based on whether > a QName is being used as a RefParam or present in RefProps. > > Problems: There are the downsides (schema-validation[2], signing[3]) to > this proposal but those appear to be manageable. This keeps the > generated headers as true SOAP headers, participating in the SOAP > processing model, including targeting the headers via @actor/@role and > marking them individually as @mustUnderstand. > > Target: Core > > Proposal: > - SOAP Headers that are added because they were part of an EPR's > ReferenceProperties are marked by adding the following attribute: > > wsa:type="property" > - SOAP Headers that are added because they were part of an EPR's > ReferenceParameters are marked by adding the following attribute: > > wsa:type="parameter" > > Complete Sample: > <SOAP-ENV:Envelope> > <SOAP-ENV:Header> > <wsa:MessageID>msgid:1234567902282223</wsa:MessageID> > <wsa:To>http://www.example.com/services/someService</wsa:To> > <wsa:Action>http://www.example.com/someAction</wsa:Action> > <wsa:From>http://www.example.com/clients/someClient</wsa:From> > ... > <tns:resourceID wsa:type="property">DataChunk42</tns:resourceID> > <tns:expires wsa:type="parameter">32000</tns:expires> > </SOAP-ENV:Header> > <SOAP-ENV:Body> > ... > </SOAP-ENV:Body> > </SOAP-ENV:Envelope> > > [1] > _http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2004Dec/0128.html_ > > [2] > _http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2004Nov/0602.html_ > > [3] > _http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-ws-addressing/2004Nov/0592.html_ > > > > *Davanum Srinivas* > Computer Associates > Senior Architect, Web Services Group > Tel: +1 508 628 8251 > davanum.srinivas@ca.com > _http://ws.apache.org/~dims/_ >
Received on Monday, 20 December 2004 19:07:21 UTC