Dale:
<JD>
From: Dale Moberg
[mailto:]
Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 1:59
PM
To:
Subject: [ebxml-msg] MEP section
2.2, some general questions about conserving ebMS 2.0 modes.
It seems to me that the 2.2 MEP section needs to be more
conservative of former MEP distinctions found useful in production and in ebMS
2.0
For example, we used to have a syncReplyMode value to describe
MEP related features in ebMS 2.0
Very popular modes were mshSignalsOnly and none.
In mshSignalsOnly a SOAP request-response MEP was used to
support sending an ebMS user message and receiving back an ack or possibly an
error.
I suppose we will now make use of some form of reliable
messaging in the HTTP response, but we still need a MEP related to the
mshSignalsOnly mode. I am not seeing a candidate here.
<JD> That is still the ebMS One-way
Push, over a composable SOAP One-way. This would allow on the SOAP response both
a reliability ack, and ebMS errors, while no user message. The binding of these
two types of signals to the SOAP response is controlled separately (all signals
not treated the same as in ebMS2): reliability Ack is controlled by the reliability
contract (P-Mode.reliability) while the reporting of errors is controlled in
(P-Mode.errorHandling). While the terms of the reliability contract are well
defined and inherited from the related specification (here with WS-Reliability
binding), other P-Mode features are not detailed in part 1. For example, an
error reporting mode like “OnResponse” would achieve what you want.
The plan is to describe this in the ebMS3 adjunct doc, along with guidance on
P-Mode representation/content and how this maps to CPPA.
For the value “none”, in effect we are saying
that two endpoints are used, and the HTTP response is used at most for SOAP
faults. How does this mode get translated?
<JD> Also ebMS One-way Push, over a fault-supporting
composable SOAP One-way. In that case, the P-Mode would preclude adding any
[ebMS] SOAP header block in the response (no Ack, no Error)
For the final committee draft and specification, I would
like to make certain that we lose no ebMS 2.0 functionality with respect to
exchange patterns. All the combinations of syncReplyMode with SOAP over HTTP
need to enabled, and where mshSignals, SOAP faults, and other errors need more
clarity.
<JD> The P-Mode prescribes these
modes. But different signals (controlled by different specifications) will be
separately controlled:
syncReplyMode=none:
ebMS MEP=One-way Push
SOAP binding: SOAP
One-way, fault-supporting, composable.
[P-Mode.reliability
with WS-Reliability] replyPattern= “Callback”, with possible
alternate ReplyTo address
[P-Mode.errorHandling]
Errors.reporting = “Callback”, (along with an error URL)
syncReplyMode=mshSignalsOnly:
ebMS MEP=One-way Push
SOAP binding: SOAP
One-way, composable
[P-Mode.reliability
with WS-Reliability] replyPattern= “Response”,
[P-Mode.errorHandling]
Errors.reporting = “OnResponse”.