RE: Issue 012: EPR Lifetime

I blogged a bit on this topic at
http://www.pacificspirit.com/blog/2004/10/26/wslifecycle

 

An argument or 2 against:

4) Timeout option behaviour would probably involve dealing with clock
skew.  Though only some specs (like WS-Security) deal with skew.

5) Timeout option behaviour could inappropriately constrain derivative
works.

 

Argument For

2) Potentially better distributed behaviour under ReplyTo/FaultTo with
just WS-Addressing

3) Potential re-use of timeout construct across layered specifications. 

 

Cheers,

Dave

 

  _____  

From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
[mailto:public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Bob Freund
Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 2004 4:40 AM
To: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
Subject: Issue 012: EPR Lifetime

 

 

Statement of issue:

At the moment there is no specification of the lifetime of an Endpoint
Reference.

What needs to be decided is:

1)   Is there a need to provide a mechanism for management of EPR
lifetime? If yes then what should it do?

2)   Or: Is there a need to make some statement concerning an implied
EPR lifetime? If yes then what?

 

Arguments Against:

1)   The web has gone well enough up to now with the tacit assumption
that uri's live forever.

2)   There is nothing like a 404 to indicate that the EPR you seek has
gone missing. The service thus has complete control over expiration.

3)   Much complexity especially in request-response MEPs. A lot of this
complexity will arise from treatment of the case of EPRs expiring
between receipt of request and receipt of response.  This complexity
will extend to further complicate all protocols that permit the use of
EPR expiration.

 

Arguments in Favor:

1)   Provides a handy way for the EPR minter to control cache contents.

 

 

 

General Puzzlements:

1)   Would EPRs compare equal if their expiration times were not equal?

2)   If one received a message with an expired EPR in its to:, whan
ought it to be dropped?

3)   If one received an expired EPR in its replyto: ought the message be
discarded?