- From: David Hull <dmh@tibco.com>
- Date: Mon, 05 Mar 2007 15:17:03 -0500
- To: "public-ws-addressing@w3.org" <public-ws-addressing@w3.org>
Right now if I assert "non-anonymous is OK here", I'm making a fairly vague statement. I'm not saying whether a non-anonymous address has to have an http:// destination, or whether it could be some WS-RX thingie, or anything of the sort. I'm just saying that there are non-anon addresses that are OK here, and presumably it will be clear out-of-band exactly which ones (or at least I can just try and maybe get a fault back). If we (or RX, or whoever) later develop vocabulary for such things, what has to change in order for policies to be tightened?
Received on Monday, 5 March 2007 20:17:14 UTC