- From: Marc Hadley <Marc.Hadley@Sun.COM>
- Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 09:42:58 -0500
- To: "public-ws-addressing@w3.org List" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
- Message-id: <C941D222-CAEB-4BFF-BBE5-C1E40367897F@Sun.COM>
At the end of yesterdays call I suggested renaming the proposed assertions to align them with terminology already in the spec. Here are some suggested names: Option 1: <wsaw:WSASupported/> <wsaw:WSAAnonymousResponses/> <wsaw:WSANonAnonymousResponses/> Option 2: <wsaw:AnonymousResponsesOnly/> <wsaw:NonAnonymousResponsesOnly/> Thanks, Marc. On Oct 22, 2006, at 1:44 PM, Francisco Curbera wrote: > > Anish and I agreed to formulate a proposal for a policy assertion > replacement to the wsaw:Anonymous marker. I think this matches > option A6 in the latest mail from Bob listing the options. > > There are two options proposed below, and we suggest we accept > Option 1 because it is simpler to use and harder to misconfigure. > They are otherwise similar in their approach. In both cases, there > is a configuration corresponding to unconstrained WSA behavior, > plus two additional configurations in which the use of the > backchannel is either mandated or prohibited for responses. > Constrained configurations can only be specified for transports > where a backchannel is available as an alternative. The names of > the assertions are of course mildly irrelevant here, as long as > they convey the correct meaning. One more point: these proposals > assume no specific implementation of the represented behavior > (which we think is the right thing to do, as long as it is clear > that they are implementable). > > Option 1: Introduce three independent policy assertions with the > meaning "full WSA support", "WSA supported with responses over > backchannel only" and "WSA supported with responses over new > connection only". wsaw:UsingAddressing is not necessary in this > case and is therefore eliminated. > > <wsaw:WSASupported/> > <wsaw:WSAResponseOverBackChannel/> > <wsaw:WSAResponseOverNewConnection/> > > Option 2: Keep wsaw:UsingAddressing and add two policy assertions > that qualify WSA support wrt the use of the backchannel: > > <wsaw:ResponsesOverBackchannelOnly/> > <wsaw:ResponsesOverNewConnectionOnly/> > > If only wsaw:UsingAddressing is used, then unrestricted WSA support > is assumed. If in addition to wsaw:UsingAddressing one of the > assertions above is used, then WSA behavior is accordingly limited > for response messages. In this case, using any of the Response* > policy assertions requires using the wsaw:UsingPolicy marker as well. > > > Paco and Anish --- Marc Hadley <marc.hadley at sun.com> Business Alliances, CTO Office, Sun Microsystems.
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Tuesday, 31 October 2006 14:43:17 UTC