Per our discussion last conf call, proposed additions to
WS-ReliableMessaging binding appendix (10.2):
- below the title (10.2):
"NOTE: This section is based on the Committee Draft 3 (February
06) of the WS-ReliableMessaging specification, which is not yet an OASIS
standard at the time the present specification is written. For this reason,
this section may not be accurate with regard to the final state of WS-ReliableMessaging.
It should be understood as only providing some indication of how a binding can
be achieved for it. In particular, this section points at some interoperability
aspects that are not covered by the above release of WS-ReliableMessaging, and
are left to be decided by the user community, or by a subsequent profiling of
this specification."
- At the end of 10.2.1:
"Among the features that require further specification or
profiling in order to enable MSH interoperability based on
WS-ReliableMessaging, are:
(a) In case the reliability contract and parameters do not apply
equally to all messages sent between two MSHs, the scope of application of a reliability
contract SHOULD be the sequence. Because a reliability module is not required
to associate reliability contracts with particular message profiles, the reliability
QoS that applies to a sequence SHOULD be communicated via CreateSequence /
CreateSequenceResponse extensibility points using a format that remains to be
determined.
(b) In case of HTTP binding, an agreement or profiling on how the operations
CreateSequence, CloseSequence and TerminateSequence, as well as their responses,
are expected to bind to HTTP MEPs. Also part of this agreement or profiling, how
sequence acknowledgements may bind to HTTP, and how they can be bundled with
other messages, if applicable.
-Jacques