- From: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2005 15:42:34 -0400
- To: Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>
- Cc: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>, public-ws-addressing@w3.org, public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
+1 Christopher Ferris STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com blog: http://webpages.charter.net/chrisfer/blog.html phone: +1 508 377 9295 public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org wrote on 08/19/2005 03:32:26 PM: > On Aug 19, 2005, at 11:10 AM, Mark Baker wrote: > >>> > >> wsa:To gives the value of the ultimate recipient, but the SOAP > >> binding is hop-by-hop so ImmediateDestination could be the address of > >> a SOAP intermediary instead of the ultimate recipient. > > > > Sorry, I don't follow. I don't know what it means for the WS-A SOAP > > binding to be hop-by-hop, since the SOAP processing model is end-to- > > end. > > > See the SOAP 1.2 Rec[1]: > > <quote> > The SOAP Processing Model enables SOAP nodes that include the > mechanisms necessary to implement one or more features to express > such features within the SOAP envelope as SOAP header blocks (see 2.4 > Understanding SOAP Header Blocks). Such header blocks can be intended > for any SOAP node or nodes along a SOAP message path (see 2.3 > Targeting SOAP Header Blocks). The combined syntax and semantics of > SOAP header blocks are known as a SOAP module, and are specified > according to the rules in 3.3 SOAP Modules. > > > > In contrast, a SOAP protocol binding operates between two adjacent > SOAP nodes along a SOAP message path. There is no requirement that > the same underlying protocol is used for all hops along a SOAP > message path... > > > > Certain features might require end-to-end as opposed to hop-by-hop > processing semantics. Although the SOAP Protocol Binding Framework > allows end-to-end features to be expressed outside the SOAP envelope, > no standard mechanism is provided for the processing by > intermediaries of the resulting messages... > > </quote> > > Also, in the Req/Resp MEP, there's some ambiguity about the > > definition of the ImmediateDestination property; > > > > "The identifier of the immediate destination of an outbound message." > > -- http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-soap12-part2-20030624/ > > #tabreqresprops > > > > (where "immediate destination" is undefined) > > > > However, the description of its value seems unambiguous that it's > > identifying the ultimate recipient; > > > > "An identifier (URI) that denotes the responding SOAP node" > > -- http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-soap12-part2-20030624/#tabreqcon > > > Yes, but from a hop-by-hop binding perspective, the next node along > the SOAP message path is the responder, its not necessarily the > ultimate recipient (though it would be for the penultimate node). > > Marc. > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-soap12-part1-20030624/#soapfeature > > --- > Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com> > Business Alliances, CTO Office, Sun Microsystems. > >
Received on Friday, 19 August 2005 19:42:42 UTC