- From: Vikas Deolaliker <vikasd@yahoo.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2005 08:25:02 -0800
- To: "'Rich Salz'" <rsalz@datapower.com>, "'Mark Baker'" <distobj@acm.org>
- Cc: <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
I hope we don't bring the NAT and it's related confusion in the world of web services routing. The same is true for demultiplexing based on semantics instead of syntax. Allowing ref. params based destination finding will only create a whole set of non-interoperable gateways which may be good for vendors but a mess from deployment perspective. Vikas -----Original Message----- From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Rich Salz Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2005 6:59 PM To: Mark Baker Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org Subject: Re: NEW ISSUE: EPR comparison rule doesn't support Web services gateways/routers > Specifically, if the > message was really intended to be sent to somewhere else down the line, > then that's where it should be addressed. If this isn't a gateway > scenario, and instead an intermediary scenario, then routing could be > used to route to the intended destination via the intermediary. Some other ways to think of it are service virtualization, demultiplexing, or (my favorite) service-oriented NAT. For all intents and purposes, a single host, and perhaps a single URL (or maybe URL prefix) is exposed to the outside world, and the internal servers and applications are never directly exposed. Architecturally, it kinda sucks (although it helps create a market for our producdts :). Unfortunately, the script kiddies and criminals have done a lot to wreck the end-to-end concept. Even REST suffers. -- Rich Salz Chief Security Architect DataPower Technology http://www.datapower.com XS40 XML Security Gateway http://www.datapower.com/products/xs40.html XML Security Overview http://www.datapower.com/xmldev/xmlsecurity.html
Received on Friday, 28 January 2005 16:25:37 UTC