- From: Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>
- Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2001 16:32:16 +0100
- To: Marwan Sabbouh <ms@mitre.org>
- CC: Kumeda <kumeda@atc.yamatake.co.jp>, "Williams, Stuart" <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Marwan Sabbouh wrote: > > Let us take your example one step further and say someone wants reliable delivery of > SOAP messages over UDP. There are two ways of doing it > > Case 1: Since UDP is unreliable, that person uses a reliable delivery protocol that > works on top of UDP. We Call it xxRTP. The protocol stack then looks like this: > > > +-------------------+ +-------------------+ > | Application |<--contract1-->| Application | > +-------------------+ +-------------------+ > ^ ^ > | contract2 contract2 | > v v > +-------------------+ +-------------------+ > | SOAP |<-- contract3-->| SOAP | > +-------------------+ +-------------------+ > ^ ^ > | contract4 contract4 | > v v > +-------------------+ +-------------------+ > | xxRTP |<-- contract5-->| xxRTP | > +-------------------+ +-------------------+ > > in this case, xxRTP provides the reliability and correlation of requests and replies. > I conclude that all is needed is a mapping that shows how SOAP messages are carried in > xxRTP's PDUs. > ...and the specification of xxRTP which in my view can equally be in the binding spec as in a separate spec. The key thing here is that the binding can say "I support a specific flavour of request response" (where a specific flavour of request response is identified by a URI and is an instance of a message exchange pattern - one or more of which we may define in the spec, leaving others to define additional ones as required) and the SOAP layer knows that what that binding means by request response is the same as any other binding. That way I can write my SOAP application in blissfull ignorance of which underlying protocol is being used rather than tying it to a particular underlying protocol and it's details. This, I think, is what the binding framework is trying to set the foundations for. > Case 2: Someone would like to provide reliability and correlation at a higher layer. Agree with what you wrote here. We provide the module framework (i.e. the SOAP envelope and processing rules) rather than every conceivable module. The binding framework is trying to do the same thing below SOAP. Regards, Marc. -- Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com> XML Technology Centre, Sun Microsystems.
Received on Wednesday, 24 October 2001 11:38:00 UTC