- From: <paul.downey@bt.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 14:35:41 +0100
- To: <mark.nottingham@bea.com>, <concahill@aol.com>
- Cc: <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
Conor, You might see allowing multiple wsa:Address values in an EPR as an obvious requirement to perform load balancing or fail-over (i'm not clear which you are proposing), but it raises a large number of questions the specification would need to answer: - is the order of the addresses important? - if so, how much more is the first address desirable over the second? - is it acceptable to send the same message to both addresses? - which failures or conditions result in sending to the alternate address? Also others in the WG will expect to see multiple addresses providing a distribution, subscription, TO/CC/BCC list, or some other, possibly unforeseen, form of multiplexing that is likely to conflict with the supposed simple use-case you have in mind. Some of the proposals discussed by the Working Group for issue#9 [1] a year ago, surrounded adding a processingStyle property to handle multiple addresses. OK, much of issue#9 discussion surrounded multiple wsa:ReplyTo's within a message, but the same issues will apply to multiple addresses within an EPR. The Working Group therefore concluded this an unnecessary complication to the base addressing specification, possibly out of scope based on the wording of the Charter, especially given: * an URI/IRI is an identifier, and may be de-referenced to another physical location or locations at the discretion of the sender * the EPR may contain meta-data to assist such de-referencing * the EPR structure is extensible allowing the addition of multiple addresses along with other information items by another specification As the person who raised issue#9 and who worked through a number of proposals for the working group to consider to support extensible, multiple addresses, or at least understand the implications of not supporting them, my member company would be very unhappy if this issue were to be reopened during CR, resulting in further delay to the already delayed schedule. Paul [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/wd-issues/#i009 -----Original Message----- From: public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org on behalf of Mark Nottingham Sent: Sat 10/15/2005 9:35 PM To: Conor P. Cahill Cc: WS-Addressing Subject: Re: Multiple Addresses in an EPR Conor, We discussed this as part of a number of WD issues, including; http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/wd-issues/#i009 http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/addr/wd-issues/#i026 I believe that the current answer is that while this isn't possible, you can embed WSDL in an EPR that contains multiple ports for the same portType, thereby achieving much of the same effect. Regards, On 15/10/2005, at 3:46 AM, Conor P. Cahill wrote: > > In working on using EPRs, we have run into several cases where EPRs > would be much more efficient if we could put multiple addresses int > one EPR (meaning that the recipient can use any of the Addresses). > > The only way to currently do this is to send multiple EPRs with > everthing other than the address duplicated across the EPRs which > is not very efficient, nor does it clearly have the same semantics > unless the client does a complete EPR comparison to determine that > the remaining data is the same. > > The need for multiple addresses is driven by our need to support > clients communicating on unstable networks, with geographically > dispersed clusters, etc. One of our applications in particular is > configured to initiate the connection on each of the addresses and > when one answers, shut down the others. > > To be clear, I am asking that the working group consider allowing > the Address element in the EPR to be a multi-occurance element > (maxOccurs="unbounded"). > > Conor -- Mark Nottingham Principal Technologist Office of the CTO BEA Systems
Received on Monday, 17 October 2005 13:35:52 UTC