- From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 9 Jun 2005 14:08:47 -0700
- To: "Liu, Kevin" <kevin.liu@sap.com>
- Cc: "Yalcinalp, Umit" <umit.yalcinalp@sap.com>, <public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org>
Thank you for your comment, which we tracked as LC101 [1]. After long deliberation the WG decided not to provide out-of-the-box support for multi-protocol transport bindings. The issue was thus closed with no action. If this resolution is unacceptable, please let us know within two weeks. [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/4/lc-issues/issues.html#LC101 > -----Original Message----- > From: Liu, Kevin [mailto:kevin.liu@sap.com] > Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 10:27 PM > To: www-ws-desc@w3.org > Cc: Jonathan Marsh; Yalcinalp, Umit > Subject: NEW ISSUE - message level binding? > > I took an action item in our last concall to open a new issue to catch > the group's discussion around using different transport protocols for > different messages of a binding operation. The issue was raised in > discussion on LC50. > > Status Quo > > In the current WSDL2.0 draft, binding type and protocol are specified > in > the binding component level, > - the binding component has a "type" property which indicates > what kind of binding (e.g soap, http, etc) is used. > - The soap binding extension adds a "protocol" property binding > component to indicate what transport is used. > > Once their values are set, those properties are applied to all the > operations and messages under that binding, and there is no build-in > constructs to overwrite them in message level. In other words, by > design, not only the input and output messages of an operation, but > all > the operations of a binding MUST use same binding type and protocol. > > > Issue > > Practically, a typical web service will use the same binding (type, > transport, etc) for all its input and output messages, but there are > situations that a service may need to specify different bindings for > different messages. Here are a few examples, > > - A service may prefer to use different transports for its "in" > message > and "out" message, e.g. to receive a request message over SOAP/HTTP > and > send the response via SOAP/SMTP. > - A service may want to specify explicitly some aspect of a transport > for individual messages. E.g. while most of the services that use an > in-out MEP over HTTP may use the same HTTP connection, some services > may > prefer use different HTTP connections for the "in" message and the > "out" > message. > - a service that supports ws-addressing replyTo and faultTo may want > to > use a different binding for such "re-direct"s. In such cases, they may > count on WSDL to provide the legal binding candidates such "redirect" > can use. > > The current spec is not clear/consistent about whether such cases are > supported by WSDL2.0. Just by looking at the WSDL component model, > they > are NOT supported, but mandatory extensions may support them by > overwriting the binding settings at message level. This inconsistency > has already caused confusion in the web services community, including > other W3C working groups. > > > Best Regards, > Kevin
Received on Thursday, 9 June 2005 21:09:04 UTC