- From: David Illsley <david.illsley@uk.ibm.com>
- Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 15:28:52 +0000
- To: Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>
- Cc: "public-ws-addressing@w3.org List" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>, public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org
Hi Marc, I have a few of questions: 1. Are these flags supposed to be proscriptive i.e. do we define behaviour if the server receives a response EPR which does not conform? 2. I assume the RM-Anon isn't supported/allowed if there is just a wsaw:AnonymousReplies? 3. I assume that, per the resolution of CR32, in the absence of wsaw:AnonymousReplies or wsaw:NonAnonymousReplies, the none-uri is supported (indeed logically is the only supported/allowed address to send)? David public-ws-addressing-request@w3.org wrote on 11/08/2006 08:50:58 PM: > Gilbert and I took an action to propose some assertions for declaring > WS-Addr requirements/capabilities in WS-Policy. After a bit of > discussion we came up with the following three assertions: > > (i) <wsaw:AddressingRequired/> - the endpoint requires WS-Addressing, > optionality can be conveyed using WS-Policy constructs. > > (ii) <wsaw:AnonymousReplies/> - the endpoint can send replies using > WS-A anonymous; the endpoint can't send to anon if not present. > > (iii) <wsaw:NonAnonymousReplies/> - the endpoint can send replies > using other addresses; the endpoint can't send to other addresses if > not present (unless some other assertion adds a class of supported > addresses). > > Assertion (iii) is deliberately vague, its presence means that a non- > anon address might work but doesn't constrain what such an address > might look like - a receiver can still reject an address that it > doesn't grok or that requires a binding it doesn't support. The WG > decided against specifying things like available response bindings so > I think this is in line with that decision. > > Here are some examples: > > <wsp:Policy> > <wsaw:AddressingRequired/> > <wsaw:AnonymousReplies/> > </wsp:Policy> > > Means that addressing is required and only anonymous replies are > supported. > > <wsp:Policy> > <wsaw:AddressingRequired/> > <wsaw:NonAnonymousReplies/> > </wsp:Policy> > > Means that addressing is required and only non-anonymous replies are > supported. > > <wsp:Policy> > <wsaw:AddressingRequired/> > <wsaw:AnonymousReplies/> > <wsaw:NonAnonymousReplies/> > </wsp:Policy> > > Means that addressing is required and both anonymous and non-anonymous > replies are supported. > > <wsp:Policy> > <wsaw:AddressingRequired> > </wsp:Policy> > > Wouldn't be too useful for anything other than a one-way message > since neither anonymous nor non-anonymouse replies are supported. > > <wsp:Policy> > <wsaw:AddressingRequired/> > <wsaw:AnonymousReplies/> > <wsfoo:AnonReplies/> > </wsp:Policy> > > Means that addressing is required and that anon replies as defined by > WS-Addr or WS-Foo are supported. > > Marc. > > --- > Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com> > CTO Office, Sun Microsystems. > >
Received on Thursday, 9 November 2006 15:26:23 UTC