- From: Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com>
- Date: Sun, 05 Jun 2005 17:06:18 +0200
- To: Rich Salz <rsalz@datapower.com>
- CC: Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>, "public-ws-addressing@w3.org" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
Rich Salz wrote: >>If we go this route I'd like to suggest we also add an optional >>timestamp field. I've had several requests for WS-addressing to offer >>support for such a thing separate from the message id itself. >> >> > >Can we point to wsu:Timestamp from OASIS WS-Security? > > I had thought about this kind of extensibility, and one option would be to make the messageId complex type extensible in some way. Before we get carried away, however, I think we should consider keeping the messageId type just having semantics of identity. WS-Reliability has a messageId complex type which has other information carried beyond idenity (e.g., first message insequence, last message in sequence), which was done for "efficiency" purposes. However, this extra information is not necessary for the uniqueness of identity. One reason to have a message id which has a globalId with an integer index is for scalability purposes. For examle, an endpoint could obtain its globalID URI at bootup time, using an integer counter of messages sent as the index. This avoids generating a new globalID for each mesage, while keeping the messageId globally unique for each message sent. Another reaons for an integer index is to enabline ordering of ids. Both WS reliability and WS- Reliable messaging use the pair as their identity. They both also add semantics of sequence to the messageID (i.e., they specify that the index must increase by one each time a new message is sent, and that the global ID represents a particular messageSequence) This sequence ID can be used for control opeations pertainig to that sequence (eg. to terminate it). . However, in some cases the sequentiality might not be required. Thus ws-addressing does not need to include the ordering semantics for the integer index . Now adding a timestamp is going beyond identity, and, for orthoganlity purposes, might be better to put somewhere else other than in the MessageId structure. If we do not need extensibility, then ws addressing can have a message ID structure as follows (which is backwards compatible with the last call messageId syntax): </xs:complexType><xs:complexType name="MessageIdType3"> <xs:simpleContent> <xs:extension base="xs:anyURI"> <xs:attribute name="index" type="xs:unsignedLong" use="optional"/> </xs:extension> </xs:simpleContent> </xs:complexType> Tom Rutt > /r$ > > > -- ---------------------------------------------------- Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133
Received on Sunday, 5 June 2005 15:08:28 UTC