RE: Issue 146 proposed resolution

>The text you suggest doesn't seem to prevent a node playing 
>the role of 
>the anonymous actor from acting as an intermediary and relaying the 

Well, it is an attempt of indicating *what* it means to act in the role
of the default/anonymous actor rather than *how* to do it. The reason
for this is that *who* is the ultimate recipient depends on from what
side one is looking.

In the scenario that I brought up some time ago about a front-end server
and a back-end server like this:

	sender  -->  front-end  --> back-end

the *sender* believes that front-end it the ultimate destination. While
this is true, the front-end has off-loaded the actual processing to the
back-end. All three parties are SOAP nodes, it is just that the way the
front-end has decided to process the message is to forward the message
to the back-end server.

In short, this model implicitly supports both intermediaries as well as
gateways. I am concerned that if we don't allow this then we will have
to define a SOAP node as an abstract entity that can contain multiple
nested SOAP nodes which in my mind is much more complicated.


Received on Wednesday, 14 November 2001 17:39:40 UTC