Re: Thoughts on TAG issue EndpointsRef47

paul.downey@bt.com wrote:

>Tom
> 
>i'm not Savas, but a sender can send the reponse wherever it
>likes! Though typically it will verify the address against a whitelist,
>then a blacklist and send it /wherever/..
>  
>
My question is simple, given an EPR, how does the sender determine where 
to send
the request associated wtih that EPR. (not the response).

I do not understand what you mean by "the sender can send the xxx 
wherever it likes"

If it send it to a random HTTP url, how can it expect that URL to 
understand the wsa:to logical address value?

I was assuming that the sender uses information in the EPR to deterimine 
the "transport"
address to send the request message to.  In the soap/http binding this 
is an HTTP URL.

tom Rutt

> 
>Paul
>
> -----Original Message----- 
> From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org on behalf of Tom Rutt 
> Sent: Mon 07/02/2005 21:26 
> To: Savas Parastatidis 
> Cc: Jonathan Marsh; public-ws-addressing@w3.org 
> Subject: Re: Thoughts on TAG issue EndpointsRef47
> 
> 
>
>
> Savas Parastatidis wrote:
> I have a question:
> 
> Given an epr, how does the sending system determine the http address to
> use to
> send the http post request, if all it has is a logical urn for the
> epr:address element?
> 
> this is not discussed in the spec.
> 
> >Hi Tom,
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> >>If what Gudge is describing is required, we might consider a multiple
> >>Protocol profile structure
> >>for the "EPR".   This is what IONA was getting at.  We could represent
> >>all the variant
> >>transport addresses required in the EPR.
> >>
> >>Otherwise I am not at all clear on how the "logical" uri gets mapped
> >>   
> >>
> >to
> > 
> >
> >>the various
> >>transport addresses required for the variants desired.
> >>
> >>   
> >>
> >
> >There may not be a need to map the "logical" URI to a specific transport
> >address. Imagine a service with a logical address
> >'urn:chocolates:service' which sells chocolates. You want to buy a
> >chocolate from a peer-to-peer network of services without caring about
> >the actual endpoint of the service that will serve you.
> >
> ><soap:Envelope>
> >  <soap:Header>
> >    <wsa:To>urn:chocolates:service</wsa:To>
> >  </soap:Header>
> >  <soap:Body>
> >    <m:OrderForm>
> >      <m:noChocolateBars>10</m:noChocolateBars>
> >      <m:maxAmmountPerChocolateBar>1000</m:maxAmmountPerChocolateBar>
> >    </m:OrderForm>
> >  </soap:Body>
> ></soap:Envelope>
> >
> >All you have to do is just give this message to the P2P network which
> >will know how to do deal with it. No need to go from a logical to a
> >transport-specific address for this service. But even if you had to,
> >there is a use case for using logical addresses as indexes in registries
> >where transport-specific endpoints can be found at runtime ("give me all
> >the transport endpoints of the urn:chocolates:service service").
> > 
> >
> How do you get interoperability unless this "registry" mechanism is
> defined in the spec?
> 
> How does the client determine the http addres (in the soap http post
> binding case) to
> send the request to for that epr?
> 
> Tom Rutt
> 
> >Regards,
> >.savas.
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> 
> 
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Tom Rutt        email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com
> Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
>  
>


-- 
----------------------------------------------------
Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com
Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133

Received on Monday, 7 February 2005 21:44:25 UTC