- From: Chou, Wu (Wu) <wuchou@avaya.com>
- Date: Mon, 4 May 2009 21:27:02 -0400
- To: "Gilbert Pilz" <gilbert.pilz@oracle.com>
- Cc: <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org>, <member-ws-resource-access@w3.org>, "Asir Vedamuthu" <asirveda@microsoft.com>, "Bob Freund" <bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>, "Li, Li (Li)" <lli5@avaya.com>
- Message-ID: <F81BDFA28AE48D4793E253362D1F7A740112AB9F@300813ANEX2.global.avaya.com>
It is a real use case, and it cannot be put into the Delivery extension because the subscriber expects a WS-E fault if not supported. Removing Mode and using SOAP extensions with mU (mustUnderstand) header is not a good option to us. Admittedly, we hope the same WS-E semantics can be used in a non-SOAP and non-EPR environment (so does the TAG of W3C), and removing Mode will create a gap. But a more practical issue with using SOAP header is: business processes, e.g. WS-BPEL, etc., are typically specified and designed at the abstract service level, and binding to SOAP or to other transports is at the late stage by an almost automatic process. Using SOAP header extensions will take away this WS-E Mode semantics from the abstract level, making it only available after SOAP binding. Unfortunately, SOAP header extensions are not very friendly to many design tools today. It is much easier to design, mock, visualize, test and verify the services at the abstract level by those tools, and it is much more difficult when SOAP header extensions, and bindings are involved. For example, SOAP header extensions handling is still a headache for many WS-BPEL engines and business process (BP) design tools today. Thanks, - Wu Chou ________________________________ From: Gilbert Pilz [mailto:gilbert.pilz@oracle.com] Sent: Thursday, April 30, 2009 1:42 PM To: Chou, Wu (Wu) Cc: public-ws-resource-access@w3.org; member-ws-resource-access@w3.org; Asir Vedamuthu; Bob Freund; Li, Li (Li) Subject: Re: [Bug 6692] New: Remove Mode from the specification Wu, I'm trying to clear something up, and I was wondering if you could help me. Has the "concrete use case" you discuss below actually been implemented by anybody, or is it a hypothetical, concrete use case? - gp Chou, Wu (Wu) wrote: +1 Asir: Many thanks for sharing your thoughts on this issue. And I attach one of our use cases of Mode in WS-E Delivery below. - Wu Chou Wu Chou, IEEE Fellow, Ph.D. | Director |Avaya Labs Research | AVAYA | 233 Mt. Airy Road| Rm. 2D48 | Basking Ridge, NJ 07920 | Voice/Fax: 908-696-5198 / 908-696-5401 | wuchou@avaya.com <blocked::mailto:wuchou@avaya.com> ------Use Case of MODE in WS-E Delivery ----- Here is a concrete use case where the subscriber requests the event source to push the event notifications through a proxy, obtained either through an out-of-band channel (not specified in the Subscribe request, e.g. the enterprise registers a special event notification proxy with the service provider) or dynamically specified in the Subscribe request. Certainly this behavior cannot be conveyed by the wse:NotifyTo. This critical use case thus justifies the need for the Mode attribute in WS-E Delivery. To indicate the use of an out-of-band proxy, the Subscribe request body looks like this: <wse:Subscribe> <wse:Delivery Mode="urn:push_thru_proxy" > <wse:NotifyTo>...</wse:NotifyTo> </wse:Delivery> </wse:Subscribe> To indicate the use of a dynamic proxy, the Subscribe request body looks like this: <wse:Subscribe> <wse:Delivery Mode="urn:push_thru_proxy" > <wse:Notifyto>...</wse:Notifyto> <ext:Proxy>...</ext:Proxy> </wse:Delivery> </wse:Subscribe> "Mode=urn:push_thru_proxy" cannot be put into the Delivery extension. This is because if the source cannot support "push_thru_proxy", it must fault as defined by Mode in Delivery, and the subscriber expects a standard wse:DeliveryModeRequestedUnavailable fault. And there is no standard WS-E fault for items in the Delivery extension. ---------- From: Asir Vedamuthu <asirveda@microsoft.com <mailto:asirveda@microsoft.com?Subject=RE%3A%20%5BBug%206692%5D%20New%3A %20Remove%20Mode%20from%20the%20specification&In-Reply-To=%253CD46B7A44F 5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp.microsoft .com%253E&References=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40N A-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp.microsoft.com%253E> > Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2009 19:59:23 -0700 To: "public-ws-resource-access@w3.org <mailto:public-ws-resource-access@w3.org?Subject=RE%3A%20%5BBug%206692%5 D%20New%3A%20Remove%20Mode%20from%20the%20specification&In-Reply-To=%253 CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp .microsoft.com%253E&References=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098 DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp.microsoft.com%253E> " <public-ws-resource-access@w3.org <mailto:public-ws-resource-access@w3.org?Subject=RE%3A%20%5BBug%206692%5 D%20New%3A%20Remove%20Mode%20from%20the%20specification&In-Reply-To=%253 CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp .microsoft.com%253E&References=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098 DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp.microsoft.com%253E> > Message-ID: <D46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7@NA-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp.. microsoft.com> <mailto:D46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7@NA-EXMSG-C118.redmond .corp..microsoft.com> 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<http://www.w3.org/Submission/2008/SUBM-WS-MetadataEx change-20080813/>, WS-Transfer<http://www.w3.org/Submission/2006/SUBM-WS-Transfer-20060927/ >, WS-Eventing<http://www.w3.org/Submission/2006/SUBM-WS-Eventing-20060315/ > and WS-Enumeration<http://www.w3.org/Submission/2006/SUBM-WS-Enumeration-200 60315/> 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 <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?Subject=R E%3A%20%5BBug%206692%5D%20New%3A%20Remove%20Mode%20from%20the%20specific ation&In-Reply-To=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-E XMSG-C118.redmond.corp.microsoft.com%253E&References=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C 4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp.microsoft.com% 253E> [mailto:public-ws-resource-access-notifications-request@w3.org <mailto:public-ws-resource-access-notifications-request@w3.org?Subject=R E%3A%20%5BBug%206692%5D%20New%3A%20Remove%20Mode%20from%20the%20specific ation&In-Reply-To=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-E XMSG-C118.redmond.corp.microsoft.com%253E&References=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C 4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp.microsoft.com% 253E> ] On Behalf Of bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org <mailto:bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org?Subject=RE%3A%20%5BBug%206692%5D%20New%3A %20Remove%20Mode%20from%20the%20specification&In-Reply-To=%253CD46B7A44F 5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp.microsoft .com%253E&References=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40N A-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp.microsoft.com%253E> Sent: Thursday, March 12, 2009 8:37 AM To: public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org <mailto:public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org?Subject=RE%3A%20% 5BBug%206692%5D%20New%3A%20Remove%20Mode%20from%20the%20specification&In -Reply-To=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C11 8.redmond.corp.microsoft.com%253E&References=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D6 9E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp.microsoft.com%253E> 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 <mailto:public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org?Subject=RE%3A%20% 5BBug%206692%5D%20New%3A%20Remove%20Mode%20from%20the%20specification&In -Reply-To=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C11 8.redmond.corp.microsoft.com%253E&References=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D6 9E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp.microsoft.com%253E> <mailto:public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org <mailto:public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org?Subject=RE%3A%20% 5BBug%206692%5D%20New%3A%20Remove%20Mode%20from%20the%20specification&In -Reply-To=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C11 8.redmond.corp.microsoft.com%253E&References=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D6 9E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp.microsoft.com%253E> > ReportedBy: david.Snelling@UK.Fujitsu.com <mailto:david.Snelling@UK.Fujitsu.com?Subject=RE%3A%20%5BBug%206692%5D%2 0New%3A%20Remove%20Mode%20from%20the%20specification&In-Reply-To=%253CD4 6B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp.mi crosoft.com%253E&References=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF 4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp.microsoft.com%253E> <mailto:david.Snelling@UK.Fujitsu.com <mailto:david.Snelling@UK.Fujitsu.com?Subject=RE%3A%20%5BBug%206692%5D%2 0New%3A%20Remove%20Mode%20from%20the%20specification&In-Reply-To=%253CD4 6B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp.mi crosoft.com%253E&References=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF 4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp.microsoft.com%253E> > QAContact: public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org <mailto:public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org?Subject=RE%3A%20% 5BBug%206692%5D%20New%3A%20Remove%20Mode%20from%20the%20specification&In -Reply-To=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C11 8.redmond.corp.microsoft.com%253E&References=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D6 9E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp.microsoft.com%253E> <mailto:public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org <mailto:public-ws-resource-access-notifications@w3.org?Subject=RE%3A%20% 5BBug%206692%5D%20New%3A%20Remove%20Mode%20from%20the%20specification&In -Reply-To=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D69E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C11 8.redmond.corp.microsoft.com%253E&References=%253CD46B7A44F5BD0C4A96D7D6 9E31C51D6B5098DCF4A7%40NA-EXMSG-C118.redmond.corp.microsoft.com%253E> > 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. Wu Chou, IEEE Fellow, Ph.D. | Director |Dialogue System Research | AVAYA | 233 Mt. Airy Road| Rm. 2D48 | Basking Ridge, NJ 07920 | Voice/Fax: 908-696-5198 / 908-696-5401 | wuchou@avaya.com <blocked::mailto:wuchou@avaya.com>
Received on Tuesday, 5 May 2009 01:27:53 UTC