MHonArc v2.5.0b2 -->

















ebxml-msg message






[Date Prev]
 | [Thread Prev]
 | [Thread Next]
 | [Date Next]

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [List Home]








Subject: Re: [ebxml-msg] Another header v 3.0 option (ws-addressing) withdiscussion and a question.




From: Doug Bunting <Doug.Bunting@Sun.COM>
To: Dale Moberg <dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 17:18:10 -0800






Dale,

Duplication or overlap of headers in a specific SOAP message certainly 
leaves that message open to conflicts and ambiguity.  For example, would 
the CPA governing the relation between the two endpoints (not the 
intermediaries) need to describe whether the ebXML Messaging headers 
have precedence over other information also available in the messages 
exchanged?  Which is the normative message identifier, the one from 
WS-Reliability or something else?

I am generally not sure where you are heading with this message because 
our specification should remain "composable" with any other headers a 
sender chooses to include, modulo the possible conflicts that arise. 
Such inclusion is not something we can control though we may mention a 
few examples of useful compositions.

With respect to our document, I would strongly recommend we avoid 
reference to work not yet available as a standard.  Reliance on open 
standards has been a strong attribute of the ebXML work to date and is 
not something we should change going forward.

thanx,
	doug

On 23-Oct-03 12:50, Dale Moberg wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> We already have identified two new WS- style headers that could take
> over some functionality of ebXML Messaging v 2.0 header, wss security
> header and wsrm reliability header. I mentioned that we could let the v
> 3.0 ebXML header remain in a reduced form that did all existing 2.0
> functionality that is not taken over by some agreed upon WS- style
> header. [We could also maybe use the original v 2.0 functionality if
> some WS- functionality was not implemented or was less preferred by some
> community. I am not certain if that makes things too complicated or
> provides us with a simple 2.0 backwards compatibility mode, which could
> be an advantage in v 3.0...]
> 
> Anyhow, I mentioned that PartyId information in the To and From elements
> of the current header seemed likely to be residual elements that were
> not captured elsewhere.
...

> Thanks
> Dale Moberg
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebxml-msg/members/leave_workgroup.php.
> 

-- 
     SunNetwork EMEA 2003 Conference and Pavilion
"Get Connected to the Future of Network Computing!"

	WHEN: December 3-4, 2003
	WHERE: ICC * Berlin, Germany

For more information or to register for the
conference, please visit http://sun.com/sunnetwork.









References:

Another header v 3.0 option (ws-addressing) with discussion and a question.
From: "Dale Moberg" <dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com>






[Date Prev]
 | [Thread Prev]
 | [Thread Next]
 | [Date Next]

--

[Date Index]
 | [Thread Index]
 | [List Home]