WS-Eventing Part II: The Subscription Response

WS-Eventing Part II

The XML Files — Fri, 13 Feb 2004 19:36:00 GMT

WS-Eventing Part II

Ryan Rinaldi's Blog — Fri, 13 Feb 2004 22:02:00 GMT

WS-Eventing workshop

kavitak's WebLog — Sat, 14 Feb 2004 05:26:00 GMT

re: WS-Eventing Part II: The Subscription Response

Adam Blum — Sun, 15 Feb 2004 06:41:00 GMT

Enjoyed your post, but it highlights two important questions about WS-Eventing:
1) are the To and Reply to in the Subscribe message headers really required. Presumably if stuff is just delivered to a specific http destination via basic SOAP the To header isn't really necessary.

Some day we'll all have WS-Addressing-enabled SOAP stacks and we'll use those To headers for handy asynchronous and indirect (potentially over intermediaries) delivery. With today's SOAP stacks, its difficult to see what that To header buys you.

2) So let's assume that the To header is required. In the SubscribeRespons presumably the To should match the ReplyTo of the Subscribe message (as your example shows). The spec should probably state that requirement.

WS-Eventing

Stefan Tilkov's Random Stuff — Mon, 16 Feb 2004 01:42:00 GMT

Microsoft's Bruce Williams has written an introduction to WS-Eventing for dummies: part 1 and part 2 [via Aaron Skonnard]...

re: WS-Eventing Part II: The Subscription Response

Bruce Williams [MSFT] — Mon, 16 Feb 2004 21:52:00 GMT

Adam - good comments! I think you pretty much answered your question #1 yourself. The WS specs that Microsoft works with are pretty determined about being transport-agnostic; and this means we can't assume that http is around, handling our session and response-reply requirements.

Whether that's a good idea; and whether the spec should have special-case optimization the case where the transport is HTTP; are both good questions that I don't have immediate answers for; guess I'll have to go talk to the architects some more...

As for question #2 - I believe the spec explicitly does not want to require that 'To' match 'ReplyTo' - I grabbed the following sentence from the relevant section of the WS-Addressing spec: "When formulating a reply message, the sender SHOULD use the contents of the [reply endpoint] of the message being replied to to formulate the reply message." I will again beg ignorance about the exact scenarios that make this desirable - did I mention that I'm the "Dummy"? <grin>

Service Specification Hub

Dave Bettin on Services — Tue, 17 Feb 2004 07:38:00 GMT

Best of breed content in reference to the WS-* specifications and the SOAPWSDLUDDI trio.

WS-Eventing for Dummies

Kirk Allen Evans' Blog — Mon, 12 Apr 2004 21:23:00 GMT

WS-Eventing for Dummies

Chris Garty's Weblog — Fri, 07 Jan 2005 00:58:00 GMT

WS-Eventing

UGbLog di Pierre Greborio — Fri, 07 Jan 2005 01:51:00 GMT

WS-Eventing

UGbLog di Pierre Greborio — Fri, 07 Jan 2005 01:51:00 GMT