- From: Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com>
- Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 08:45:37 -0800
- To: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
- CC: Marc.Hadley@sun.com, public-ws-addressing@w3.org
There are many examples: eg: send a purchase order as wsdl request/respose, with the supplier's poID in the wsdl response, which serves as an ack that the PO has been accepted for processing by the supplier. A callback address (which could use ReplyTo) could be sent with the PO request, to send the Invoice to, in a later wsdl operation from the supplier to the customer. In fact, the Reply To is not even needed for a wsdl request/response operation which is bound to a request response binding (e.g. soap/http Post binding), since the response comes back on the same tcp connection as the request. Tom Rutt Martin Gudgin wrote: > > > > >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM [mailto:Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM] >>Sent: 12 November 2004 04:08 >>To: Martin Gudgin >>Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org >>Subject: Re: i028: Implications of the presence of ReplyTo >> >>On Nov 11, 2004, at 3:01 PM, Martin Gudgin wrote: >> >> >>>>So it sounds like you'd be in favor of saying that presence >>>>of ReplyTo >>>>implies a request is expected and that absence indicates a one-way >>>>message ? >>>> >>>> >>>Nope. I think that if you expect a reply, you MUST specify [reply >>>endpoint]. So in request-response style MEPs [reply endpoint] would >>>always be specified in the request message. However, I >>> >>> >>don't think that >> >> >>>specifying [reply endpoint] necessarily means you expect a reply (in >>>request/response stylee). Does that make sense. I'm saying >>> >>> if a then b >>> >>>but I'm NOT saying >>> >>> if b then a >>> >>> >>> >>I understand what you mean but I'm not sure it makes sense ;-). If we >>could say that presence of ReplyTo indicates that a reply is expected >>then that would seem like a useful semantic. What's the purpose of a >>ReplyTo in a message that isn't expected to generate a reply ? >> >> > >OK, it depends on what you mean when you say 'generate a reply'. Do you >mean > >a) 'generate a reply as part of the same WSDL MEP' > >or > >b) 'generate a reply, not necessarily part of the same WSDL MEP' > >I have certain protocols that do specify a [reply endpoint], do expect >(hope?) that a reply to be sent at some point, but NOT as part of the >same WSDL operation as the initial message. > >Cheers > >Gudge > > > -- ---------------------------------------------------- Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133
Received on Friday, 12 November 2004 16:47:46 UTC