Re: Thoughts on TAG issue EndpointsRef47

On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 15:40:58 -0500, Tom Rutt <> wrote:
> Otherwise I am not at all clear on how the "logical" uri gets mapped to
> the various
> transport addresses required for the variants desired.

The intent of [TransportAddress]/[RequestUri] was to remove the need
to define such a mapping. By including the transport address
explicitly, you don't need to a complicated mechansim to divine
multiple protocol-specific addresses based on a single URI. That said,
I could see a resonable default rule in place whereby the value of
[RequestUri] is assumed to be the same as [Address] if a different
value is not explicitly provided.

The rules for squirting the value of [RequestUri] into the appropriate
place in the underlying protocol would be implied by the value's URI


Received on Sunday, 6 February 2005 22:21:46 UTC