- From: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
- Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2006 18:19:48 -0500
- To: Francisco Curbera <curbera@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
- Message-id: <43E7D994.60902@tibco.com>
Francisco Curbera wrote: >1. Restrict the defaulting of To to the anonymous URI to response messages >only. This is fully consistent with the resolution of CR17, that restricts >the defaulting of ReplyTo (to the "anonymous EPR") to request messages. >Advantages: consistent approach to the use of defaults for optimizing the >synch request response patter, but leaving other potential issues >unmodified. > > The proposal 3 currently on the table builds on the same notion of consistency, but I don't think this notion necessarily follows in either case. In the case of reply-to: we limited the handling of anonymous to request messages because reply-to: only has a natural meaning at all in request messages. That's not to say that one couldn't define further meanings, just that there's no single obvious way to do so. >From the resolutions of CR17 and i067/i068/cr 15, it seems pretty clear that all we're saying is that an anonymous response endpoint occurs in the context of a SOAP request-response MEP, it means to use the response message of the MEP. We don't /disallow/ it in other circumstances (whatever those may be). Note also that we handle SOAP 1.1/HTTP and SOAP 1.2/everything separately. The most consistent way to extend this to [destination] would be to state what anonymous [destination] /does/ mean in a given set of circumstances. There doesn't seem to be any controversy that for a response message, anonymous [destination] would mean use the response message of a request response MEP. Saying this doesn't /disallow/ other meanings elsewhere, any more than talking about reply-to: in requests disallowed anything else. Beyond that, we /might/ say that anonymous [destination] for requests means the destination URL of a SOAP 1.1/HTTP request, or that anonymous [destination] for any SOAP 1.2 message is the ImmediateDestination property if it's defined, or we might leave it undefined. Whatever we say, to be consistent with the resolutions we've already decided, we should handle SOAP 1.1/HTTP and SOAP 1.2/everything separately.
Received on Monday, 6 February 2006 23:21:17 UTC