- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2006 17:01:21 -0500
- To: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
- Cc: "public-ws-addressing@w3.org" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
As this relates to the TAG's endPointRefs-47 issue, I'd suggest that an absent wsa:To header should imply that the endpoint address is that provided in the envelope of the containing application protocol (when one is in use). e.g. the HTTP Request-URI on an HTTP hop. Mark. On 2/8/06, David Hull <dmh@tibco.com> wrote: > There are basically three choices: > > > Status quo. Missing wsa:To in the infoset means [destination] == anonymous > in the MAPs, always. > Limit this defaulting to the context of request-response. If you want to > use an anonymous [destination] elsewhere, you have to do so explicitly. > Get rid of defaulting entirely. You must always spell out what value you > want for [destination]. Separately from this, we can place various > restrictions on the use of anonymous [destination], however it may have > arisen, as part of resolving CR 18. For example, in any of the three cases, > we could say that anonymous [destination] is only allowed for response > messages as a result of section 3.4. We could also ban anonymous > [destination] altogether.
Received on Thursday, 9 February 2006 22:01:24 UTC