- From: Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com>
- Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 12:56:59 -0400
- To: Gilbert Pilz <Gilbert.Pilz@bea.com>
- Cc: public-ws-addressing@w3.org
Gilbert Pilz wrote:
>
> I have a long-running operation in which I want the normal response to
> go to a specific, non-anonymous endpoint but for which I would like
> any SOAP or WS-Addressing faults to be immediately returned on the
> back-channel. The headers in the request message might look something
> like this:
>
> <wsa:ReplyTo>
>
> <wsa:Address>http://webservice.bea.com/_async/AsyncResponseService</wsa:Address>
>
> </wsa:ReplyTo>
> <wsa:FaultTo>
>
> <wsa:Address>http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/anonymous</wsa:Address>
> </wsa:FaulTo>
>
> It should be possible to define a policy alternative (matchable by a
> client using only the WS-Policy intersection algorithm) that allows
> this interaction.
>
> - gp
>
The following are examples of policy attached to the response sending
endpoint to satisfy Gill use case above:
Policy.for.Gil.Use.case.using.Alterntative.F:.
......(explicit.support.claims,.empty.=.no.responses)
<Policy>
...<ExactlyOne>
......<All>
.........<wsa:Addressing>...<--.Addressing.required,
both.responses.supported-->
............<Policy>
<wsa:AnonymousResponses./>
<wsa:NonanonymousResponses/>
</Policy>
.........</wsa:Addressing>
......</All>
...</ExactlyOne>
</Policy>
Policy.for.Gil.Use.Case.using.Alternative.G.
(empty implies support for both response types, nested assertion
implies requirement for one response type)
<Policy>
...<ExactlyOne>
......<All>
.........<wsa:Addressing>...<--.Addressing.required,
both.responses.supported-->
............<Policy>
</Policy>
.........</wsa:Addressing>
......</All>
...</ExactlyOne>
</Policy>
--
----------------------------------------------------
Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com
Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133
Received on Friday, 23 March 2007 16:57:45 UTC