RE: Issue 8164: proposal

My preference is to drop the sentence since it is a restatement of a valid implementation choice/behavior.

Wu: Is there a reason why you prefer to have this sentence?

Thanks.

From: Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 09, 2009 4:00 PM
To: Ram Jeyaraman
Cc: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org
Subject: RE: Issue 8164: proposal


The 2nd sentence was added to try to address Wu's concerns that he mentioned during the call yesterday.  What if we soften it a bit by removing the normative words:
Note: as an optimization, a subscriber might want to consider using the same WS-MakeConnection Anonymous URI in both the NotifyTo and EndTo EPRs to allow the same MakeConnection message to be used to transmit either notifications or a SubscriptionEnd message.

thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com<mailto:dug@us.ibm.com>
The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog.

Ram Jeyaraman <Ram.Jeyaraman@microsoft.com<mailto:Ram.Jeyaraman@microsoft.com>>

12/09/2009 06:36 PM

To

Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, "public-ws-resource-access@w3.org<mailto:public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>" <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org<mailto:public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>>

cc

Subject

RE: Issue 8164: proposal







>  A subscription manager MAY choose to support mechanisms, such as the [WS-MakeConnection] specification, to enable delivery of notifications and the SubscriptionEnd message to non-addressable endpoints.

This looks good.

>  Note: as an optimization, a subscriber SHOULD consider using the same WS-MakeConnection Anonymous URI in both the NotifyTo and EndTo EPRs to allow the same MakeConnection message to be used to transmit either notifications or a SubscriptionEnd message.

Since there are valid situations that may require using different WS-MakeConnection Anonymous URIs in the NotifyTo and EndTo EPRs, the specification need not restrict the usage. Hence, I suggest deleting this sentence.

Thanks.

From: public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org<mailto:public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org> [mailto:public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org]<mailto:[mailto:public-ws-resource-access-request@w3.org]> On Behalf Of Doug Davis
Sent: Tuesday, December 08, 2009 10:08 PM
To: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org<mailto:public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>
Subject: Issue 8164: proposal


(resending w/o extra stuff)

Proposal:
change:
A subscription manager MAY choose to support mechanisms, such as the [WS-MakeConnection] specification, to enable delivery of notifications to non-addressable endpoints.
to:
A subscription manager MAY choose to support mechanisms, such as the [WS-MakeConnection] specification, to enable delivery of notifications and the SubscriptionEnd message to non-addressable endpoints. Note: as an optimization, a subscriber SHOULD consider using the same WS-MakeConnection Anonymous URI in both the NotifyTo and EndTo EPRs to allow the same MakeConnection message to be used to transmit either notifications or a SubscriptionEnd message.

thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM |  Standards Architect  |  IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905  |  IBM 444-6905  |  dug@us.ibm.com<mailto:dug@us.ibm.com>
The more I'm around some people, the more I like my dog.