- From: Jean-Jacques Moreau <moreau@crf.canon.fr>
- Date: Thu, 03 Oct 2002 13:55:48 +0200
- To: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
- CC: www-ws-arch@w3.org, Hugo Haas <hugo@w3.org>
As all SOAP 1.2 bindings, the MOM-based binding would be expected to make the sender's address available via the reqres:ImmediateSender property. If that was not the return address, the return address could be carried in a binding specific manner, for example via a header field of the underlying protocol. The EMail binding shows how you can do this for the Correlation feature[1]. Rather than implementing the ReturnAddress feature via a binding, one could implement it via a SOAP Module, as you are pointing out. Bindings are not supposed to consumme or otherwise process application modules (headers that are normally processed by applications); but bindings are allowed, I think, to augment the infoset to transport, and so a binding might very well decide to insert its own header before sending the message, that header being consummed by the receiving binding, and made available to the application via a specific property, for example myBinding:returnAddress. A third option would be to implement the ReturnAddress feature as a SOAP Module explicitely handled by the application. The binding would not be involved at all. Does this help? [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/NOTE-soap12-email-20020626#correlation Ugo Corda wrote: >>This has to be contrasted with other features (e.g. signature) >>that may leave outside the binding, e.g. expressed as SOAP header >>block(s). > > > What if I had a Request-Response MEP and a MOM-based binding. In that case, > I would probably need to put the return address information in some header, > so that the receiving service can know where to send the (asynchronous) > answer back to. Would you consider that header to be part of the binding?
Received on Thursday, 3 October 2002 07:55:48 UTC