- From: Kumeda <kumeda@atc.yamatake.co.jp>
- Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 09:30:27 +0900
- To: Marwan Sabbouh <ms@mitre.org>
- CC: "williams, stuart" <skw@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, Marc Hadley <marc.hadley@sun.com>, xml-dist-app@w3.org
Hello Marwan,
> In the above scenario, the reliability and correlation must be defined in
> terms of SOAP header blocks. In my opinion, it is not our task to define
> those header blocks that implements this functionality. Rather, our task
> should be to define a mechanism by which a SOAP processor imports
> this functionality and makes it available for interested applications. The
> file that defines those header blocks can be called a module. This
> module can be formally specified by another WG or a standard body
> and it MUST use SOAP.
If such correlation must be defined in terms of SOAP header blocks, I believe it
should be defined by the SOAP protocol itself. This does not mean SOAP protocol
should handle such correlation within it.
According to the XMLP Abstract Model document, a SOAP user application may
specify message-ids to correlate a request with a response. This requires SOAP
protocol to somehow retain this information, either by transmitting it within a
SOAP message (possibly in its header) or by providing such information to the
transport layer through its service interface.
>
> Note that you need to specify how SOAP messages are carried in UDP's
> PDUs. Also note that the SOAP processor did not change in both cases.
Yes, I agree. I would also state that the SOAP user interface should not be
affected by an underlying transport layer, since a user usually doesn't know
about it.
Best regards,
Yasuo
--
Kumeda, Yasuo TEL: +81-466-20-2430
FAX: +81-466-20-2431
Research and Development Headquarters
Yamatake Corporation
Fujisawashi Kawana 1-12-2
Kanagawa, 251-8522 JAPAN
Received on Thursday, 25 October 2001 20:41:20 UTC