- From: Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2009 16:45:14 -0400
- To: "Kemp, Devon" <Devon.Kemp@cda.canon.com>
- Cc: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org, public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org
- Message-ID: <OF0EA3A1B7.FA1B2C7E-ON8525759E.0067742F-8525759E.00720111@us.ibm.com>
How can something formally 'defined' (I use that term loosely) as "simple
asynchronous messaging" be critical for interoperability?
To equate @Mode with the SOAP Binding Framework, as Asir has attempted
below, is like comparing a cardboard hovel with the architecture of
Frank Lloyd Wright's Oak Park home (ok, I'll admit a bit of contributor's
bias:-)
In fact, there is more information describing @Mode in Asir's note below,
than there is in the WS-E specification. Somehow, that seems
wrong.
So, help me to understand how something that is so under-defined can be
critical to an implementation. If the
implementation is in fact keying off of the Push mode URI and invoking
some prescribed behavior, where is this behavior
specified? Certainly, not in the WS-E specification.
As to your point #4, how can something that is so profoundly
under-specified _not_ be considered broken? At the very least, the WG
will need to specify _precisely_ what Push means and it seems as if it
will need to define at least as much as Asir's note below as
to the "framework" for @Mode - and I think that lines will need to be
drawn so as not take us down the slippery slope whereby
@Mode becomes an alternative to WS-Policy and WS-MEX. Still, I would
prefer that instead we align WS-E with the rest of the
composable WS-* stack.
If instead, the WG would define the precise specification of how WS-Policy
can be incorporated into an EPR (which is loosely
described, but not formally defined in the WS-MEX submission, and which
prompted the WS-PAEPR submission) would not be
a vast improvement over the under-specified @Mode and an approach that
tied right into the rest of the composable WS-* stack
towards which we have all been working so hard to achieve.
Cheers,
Christopher Ferris
IBM Distinguished Engineer, CTO Industry Standards
IBM Software Group, Standards Strategy
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/chrisferris
phone: +1 508 234 2986
From:
"Kemp, Devon" <Devon.Kemp@cda.canon.com>
To:
<public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>
Date:
04/20/2009 02:42 PM
Subject:
RE: [Bug 6692] New: Remove Mode from the specification
Sent by:
public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org
Greetings—
Canon is also very concerned about the proposal to remove the Delivery
Mode attribute, and defined delivery modes, from the WS-Eventing
specification.
1) Canon has several products currently in the market that contain
implementations of DPWS, which relies on the Push Mode of event delivery.
Should the WS-Eventing specification remove the delivery mode, our
investment in DPWS will be at risk.
2) It appears that you’re not requiring any specific type of delivery
mode. We have learned that in order to assure interoperability, there must
be at least one defined type of delivery modes. Push mode has been used in
several applications of DPWS and has proved (at least to us) to be an easy
to implement, common denominator, for eventing messages.
3) The lack of a formal extension point (“Delivery Mode”) prevents easy
adoption by other specifications in the industry, reducing WS-Eventing’s
usability.
4) Nothing appears to be gained by the removal of the Delivery Mode
attribute. (Don’t fix something that isn’t broken.)
We ask that you please reconsider your proposal to remove the Delivery
Mode attribute, and keep this in the WS-Eventing specification.
Best Regards,
-Devon Kemp
Canon
From: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org [
mailto:public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Asir
Vedamuthu
Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2009 7:59 PM
To: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
Subject: RE: [Bug 6692] New: Remove Mode from the specification
Last week, on the WG conference call, I mentioned that we will provide
some clarity on the concept of delivery mode (in WS-Eventing) and related
use cases.
Delivery mode [1] provides a subscriber with a mechanism to specify the
means by which an event is delivered. Delivery mode is represented as a
URI in a Subscribe message [2]. The semantics indicated by a delivery mode
are:
1) Rules for the delivery of events
a) Semantics and lifecycle of a Notification delivery
b) Message Exchange Pattern used (One-way, Request-Response, etc.) and
how the delivery mode binds to those Message Exchange Patterns
c) Format of a response (if any)
d) Configuration parameters or context data (if any) to support the
Message Exchange Pattern
e) Rules for the delivery or other disposition of faults generated during
a Notification delivery
2) Delivery mode specific protocol information (if any) to guarantee
interop
3) Supported delivery formats.
Some portion of the above semantics are captured by an EPR, in a
machine-readable form, but certainly not all. So, there is value added by
a formal mechanism to indicate a delivery mode.
The delivery mode is an extension point in WS-Eventing. The WS-Eventing
specification defines a single built-in delivery mode, Push Mode. Other
delivery modes may be important for external groups or other W3C Working
Groups and are delegated to those groups. This is similar to SOAP
Bindings. The W3C XML Protocol WG defined SOAP Protocol Binding Framework
as an extension point and a concrete binding, SOAP HTTP Binding (is also
identified using a URI [3]). Other groups defined SOAP bindings such as
SOAP-over-JMS and SOAP-over-UDP.
The DMTF WS-Management WG defined three new delivery modes [4] and these
delivery modes have been widely adopted.
Furthermore, based on the WS-RA WG charter [5], the WG deliverables need
to satisfy the following requirements as well:
1) Charter scope - “Mechanisms to allow a subscriber to specify the means
by which an event is delivered and the definition of a push-based delivery
mode”.
2) Charter scope – “In order to avoid disrupting the interoperability of
existing implementations, WS-MetadataExchange, WS-Transfer, WS-Eventing
and WS-Enumeration should remain compatible with protocols and formats
that depend on them, and offer a smooth migration path from the submission
to the standard.” We are aware of two dependant protocols – DPWS [6] (uses
Push Mode) and WS-Management [4] (uses Push Mode and, as mentioned before,
defines three new delivery modes).
[1] http://www.w3.org/Submission/WS-Eventing/#Delivery_Modes
[2] http://www.w3.org/Submission/WS-Eventing/#Subscribe
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/REC-soap12-part2-20030624/#http-bindname
[4] http://www.dmtf.org/standards/published_documents/DSP0226.pdf -
Section 7
[5] http://www.w3..org/2008/11/ws-ra-charter.html#scope
[6] http://specs.xmlsoap.org/ws/2006/02/devprof/
We hope this helps.
Regards,
Asir S Vedamuthu
Microsoft Corporation
-----Original Message-----
From: public-ws-resource-access-notifications-request@w3.org [
mailto:public-ws-resource-access-notifications-request@w3.org] On Behalf
Of bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org
Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 8:37 AM
To: public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org
Subject: [Bug 6692] New: Remove Mode from the specification
http://www.w3..org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=6692
Summary: Remove Mode from the specification
Product: WS-Resource Access
Version: CR
Platform: PC
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: major
Priority: P2
Component: Eventing
AssignedTo: public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org
ReportedBy: david.Snelling@UK.Fujitsu.com
QAContact: public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org
The concept of Mode is redundant in the current version of the
specification.
All events can be thought of as being delivered. There is no actual
definition
of "Push Mode" and no other recommended modes. We even have a
MakeConnection
strategy to allow clients behind NATs to fetch events. Likewise,
strategies for
complex queuing and distribution are supportable without adding additional
modes and are outside the scope of this specification.
Proposal: Remove /s:Envelope/s:Body/*/wse:Delivery/@Mode from the
specification
and all references to Push Mode. A simple explanation of the delivery idea
and
a pointer to some of the techniques available will be needed.
--
Configure bugmail: http://www..w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
You are the assignee for the bug.
Received on Monday, 20 April 2009 20:46:01 UTC