Re: Thoughts on TAG issue EndpointsRef47

paul.downey@bt.com wrote:

>s/reponse/message/ my bad.
> 
>my point is that as with real world addresses, the urn denotes 
>the message recipient, and not (always) the way the message 
>should be transported. 
>  
>
Would you say the mapping from a logical wsa:to element to the way the 
message is transported
is part of ws-addressing?

If not, where is this mapping specified?

Tom Rutt

> 
>-----Original Message----- 
>From: Tom Rutt [mailto:tom@coastin.com] 
>Sent: Mon 07/02/2005 21:43 
>To: Downey,PS,Paul,XAGA C 
>Cc: Savas.Parastatidis@newcastle.ac.uk; jmarsh@microsoft.com; public-ws-addressing@w3.org 
>Subject: 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
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
>
>  
>


-- 
----------------------------------------------------
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 22:40:35 UTC