RE: [ogsa-wg] RE: [ogsa-naming-wg] WS-Names and WS-Addressing WSDL Binding

11 Oct 2005


      I'm sorry Marty, I didn't mean to.  My bad -- I must have misread what you
wrote.

-Mark
...
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ogsa-wg@ggf.org [mailto:owner-ogsa-wg@ggf.org] On 
Behalf Of Marty Humphrey
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 2:16 PM
To: 'Mark Morgan'; Maguire_Tom@emc.com; ogsa-wg@ggf.org
Cc: ogsa-naming-wg@ggf.org; tuecke@univa.com; 
David.Snelling@uk.fujitsu.com
Subject: RE: [ogsa-wg] RE: [ogsa-naming-wg] WS-Names and 
WS-Addressing WSDL Binding
You're making quite a leap from what I said.
-- Marty
...
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ogsa-wg@ggf.org [mailto:owner-ogsa-wg@ggf.org] 
On Behalf 
Of Mark Morgan
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 2:14 PM
To: 'Marty Humphrey'; Maguire_Tom@emc.com; ogsa-wg@ggf.org
Cc: ogsa-naming-wg@ggf.org; tuecke@univa.com; 
David.Snelling@uk.fujitsu.com
Subject: RE: [ogsa-wg] RE: [ogsa-naming-wg] WS-Names and 
WS-Addressing 
WSDL Binding
I suspect though unfortunately that prototype 
implementations will be 
difficult to come by if they are to be written for specs 
that assume 
tooling not yet available.  I guess in some circumstances 
it might be 
possible, but it seems like a hardway to do things and I don't like 
the idea of specs not having prototype implementations.
-Mark
...
-----Original Message-----
From: Marty Humphrey [mailto:humphrey@cs.virginia.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 2:10 PM
To: 'Mark Morgan'; Maguire_Tom@emc.com; ogsa-wg@ggf.org
Cc: ogsa-naming-wg@ggf.org; tuecke@univa.com; 
David.Snelling@uk.fujitsu.com
Subject: RE: [ogsa-wg] RE: [ogsa-naming-wg] WS-Names and 
WS-Addressing WSDL Binding
I don't like the sound of this.
For me, the real question is - if the existing tooling does not 
support some approach -- HOW DIFFICULT is it to manipulate the 
existing tooling (e.g., a small hunk of additional code, perhaps) 
and HOW SOON is this additional code projected to appear in the 
tooling itself (this projected date must be agreed-to via 
consensus)?
It seems overly restrictive to say that if Sun and/or 
Microsoft et. 
al.
don't support it today, then we can't do it.
-- Marty
...
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ogsa-wg@ggf.org [mailto:owner-ogsa-wg@ggf.org]
On Behalf
Of Mark Morgan
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 2:01 PM
To: Maguire_Tom@emc.com; ogsa-wg@ggf.org
Cc: ogsa-naming-wg@ggf.org; tuecke@univa.com; 
David.Snelling@uk.fujitsu.com
Subject: RE: [ogsa-wg] RE: [ogsa-naming-wg] WS-Names and
WS-Addressing
WSDL Binding
All I mean to imply is that WS-Naming v. 1.0 should and
must be bound
by the tooling limitations which are projected to exist at the 
time that that version of the specification is made public.
-Mark
...
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ogsa-wg@ggf.org
[mailto:owner-ogsa-wg@ggf.org] On Behalf
Of Maguire_Tom@emc.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 1:53 PM
To: mmm2a@virginia.edu; ogsa-wg@ggf.org
Cc: ogsa-naming-wg@ggf.org; tuecke@univa.com; 
David.Snelling@uk.fujitsu.com
Subject: RE: [ogsa-wg] RE: [ogsa-naming-wg] WS-Names and 
WS-Addressing WSDL Binding
That may be true at the moment. But when the WS-Addressing - 
WSDL Binding spec is done (or shortly there after) 
that should 
not be true.  Let me put it this way; if we have an EPR per 
protocol address we have failed miserably.
I am sure you are not implying that the Naming
architecture should
be bounded by the current toolings limitations.
Tom
-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Morgan [mailto:mmm2a@virginia.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 12:57 PM
To: Maguire, Tom; ogsa-wg@ggf.org
Cc: ogsa-naming-wg@ggf.org; tuecke@univa.com; 
David.Snelling@uk.fujitsu.com
Subject: RE: [ogsa-wg] RE: [ogsa-naming-wg] WS-Names and 
WS-Addressing WSDL Binding
My experience has been that available tooling (Microsoft and
Java) doesn't support Address lines that aren't URLs.  Am I 
wrong about this?
-Mark
...
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ogsa-wg@ggf.org [mailto:owner-ogsa-wg@ggf.org]
On Behalf
Of Maguire_Tom@emc.com
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 12:49 PM
To: ogsa-wg@ggf.org
Cc: ogsa-naming-wg@ggf.org; tuecke@univa.com; 
David.Snelling@uk.fujitsu.com
Subject: [ogsa-wg] RE: [ogsa-naming-wg] WS-Names and
WS-Addressing
WSDL Binding
As promised at the F2F in Boston I have started a thread of
discussion
on the subject line.  I have reposted the thread to the
this mailing
list
(ogsa-wg) in the hope that broader distribution will spur
debate and
discussion.
Tom
-----Original Message-----
From: Maguire, Tom
Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2005 4:51 PM
To: Maguire, Tom; David.Snelling@UK.Fujitsu.com
Cc: ogsa-naming-wg@ggf.org; tuecke@univa.com
Subject: RE: [ogsa-naming-wg] WS-Names and WS-Addressing
WSDL Binding
Dave you mentioned in one of your question:
>>It appears that in the example that either the
was:Address and the
>>soap:address must be the same or that the wsa:Addess is
irrelevant.
>> I can't really believe the former so let's 
assume the later.
It's not that the wsa:adddress is irrelevant it is that the 
wsa:address is logical as opposed to physical.  This is
precisely why
I think we can use it....
Tom
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ogsa-naming-wg@ggf.org 
[mailto:owner-ogsa-naming-wg@ggf.org] On Behalf Of Maguire, 
Tom
Sent: Sunday, October 09, 2005 8:35 AM
To: David.Snelling@UK.Fujitsu.com
Cc: ogsa-naming-wg@ggf.org; tuecke@univa.com
Subject: RE: [ogsa-naming-wg] WS-Names and WS-Addressing
WSDL Binding
Dave,
I'll do my best to answer your questions inline below.  Let
me caution
this thread a bit.  The WSDL Binding specification is not
complete and
is clearly still evolving...
>>It appears that in the example that either the
was:Address and
>>the
soap:address must
>>be the same or that the wsa:Addess is irrelevant. I
can't really
>>believe
the
>>former so let's assume the later.
Yes, I believe that is the intent.  As I mentioned in
my note it
is 'interesting' that they are the same.  My guess is
that makes
implementations that are not <wsa:metadata> aware able
to cope.  I
would expect that would be a 'best practice'.
Not sure what the implications would be for us if that were 
the case...
>>With a wsdl11:definitions section present, the wsa:Address
field must
>>be
superseded
>>by the soap:address chosen by the client. I 
assume that the 
>>soap:address gets copied to the was:To field in the
soap header.
Ultimately you are correct however I expect that the
specification of
that
linkage would not be quite as explicit as that.
>>There is no linkage in the wsdl11:definitions to 
connect the 
>>wsa:Address
to it.
No
>>Q1) What happens with more than one wsdl11:definitions
section in the
>>was:Metadata?
I have no idea what that would even mean.  I presume they
would limit
that in the spec.  As I said it is still evolving.
>>Q2) In this case can we put any old junk in the 
wsa:Address?
>>i.e. leave it out (except that the scheme saus [1..].
<wsa:address> is required and I would assume that at a
minimum there
would be a statement of 'best practice' where the
<wsa:address> is the
'default'
address.
>>Q3) If we use the wsa:Address as an Abstract Name, how do
we know that
>>is
what
>>we are doing? We could  subtype the EPR to create 
a WS-Name
as we do
>>now, and bind the usage of the was:Address to type of
the WS-Name.
I would use a wsi conformance claim on both the wsdl and
the EPR.  The
wsdl claim would be that the service is capable of 
generating 
WS-Names.  The EPR claim would be that this EPR 
adheres to the 
additional semantics of a WS-Name.
>>Q4) I thought WS-Addressing was NOT about naming 
or identity.
>>How will this use (abuse) of the wsa:Address go down with
the W3C folks?
I think this is a misread on your part W3C objected to
identity being
encoded in something OTHER than a URI (IRI); in the
WS-Addressing case
they objected to ReferenceProperties.  Ultimately
ReferenceProperties
were merged with ReferenceParameters which weakened
(removed) the
identity semantic.  I think they would be extremely happy
with the use
of a URI as an identifier :-).
Tom
On 7 Oct 2005, at 12:41, Maguire_Tom@emc.com wrote:
> This will be a fairly long note to discuss the current
incarnation of
> WS-Naming Abstract Names.  An Abstract Name has the 
> following
> properties:
>
> *	The name MUST be globally unique in both space and time.
> *	The name conforms to URI syntax ("Uniform Resource
Identifiers
> (IRI): Generic Syntax", RFC 3987).
>
> Let's leave aside the first point, for the time being,
and focus on
> the second point.  The abstract name is an IRI 
which is an 
> internationalized URI.  Currently this means that 
a WS-Name
abstract
> name would look like
> this:
>
> <wsa:EndpointReference
>     xmlns:wsa="http://www.w3.org/2005/03/addressing"
>     xmlns:name="http://ggf.org/name">
>         
> <wsa:Address>http://tempuri.org/example</wsa:Address>
>
>
<name:AbstractName>urn:guid:B94C4186-0923-4dbb-AD9C-39DFB8B54388
> </
> name:Abstr
> actName>
> </wsa:EndpointReference>
>
> There are several built in assumptions in this particular
rendering of
> an
> abstract name.   First, there is an assumption that the
<wsa:Address>
> is the
> [destination] MAP of the EPR.  Second, the AbstractName
does not need
> to flow on the wire when 'dereferencing' this EPR.
>
> It may be ok for the AbstractName to not flow on the
wire.  I will
> leave that discussion to others.  Let's focus on 
the first 
> assumption...
> If you assume that the <wsa:Address> is NOT necessarily a
physical
> address
> (URL) then it is essentially the same as an AbstractName
minus the
> "MUST be globally unique in both space and time" property
described
> above.
>
> This is essentially how 'Web Services Addressing 
1.0 - WSDL
Binding'
> defines
> a <wsa:Address>.  An example from that specfication:
>
> <wsa:EndpointReference
>     xmlns:wsa="http://www.w3.org/2005/03/addressing">
>   
<wsa:Address>http://example.com/fabrikam/acct</wsa:Address>
>   <wsa:Metadata>
>     <wsdl11:definitions
targetNamespace="http://example.com/fabrikam"
>         xmlns:fabrikam="http://example.com/fabrikam"
>         xmlns:abc="http://www.abccorp.com/"
>         xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/soap/"
>         xmlns:iiop="http://www.iiop.org/"
>         xmlns:wsdl11="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/">
>       <wsdl11:import 
namespace="http://example.com/fabrikam"
>
location="http://example.com/fabrikam/fabrikam.wsdl"/>
>       <wsdl11:import namespace="http://www.abccorp.com/"
>           location="http://www.abccorp.com/abc.wsdl"/>
>       <wsdl11:service name="InventoryService">
>         <wsdl11:port name="ep1"
binding="abc:soap-http-binding">
>           <soap:address
location="http://example.com/fabrikam/acct"/>
>         </wsdl11:port>
>         <wsdl11:port name="ep2" binding="abc:iiop">
>           <iiop:address location="..."/>
>         </wsdl11:port>
>       </wsdl11:service>
>     </wsdl11:definitions>
>   </wsa:Metadata>
> </wsd:EndpointReference>
>
> And also from 'Web Services Addressing 1.0 - WSDL Binding'
>
> 	In particular, embedding a WSDL service component
description MAY be
> used by EPR issuers to indicate the presence of 
alternative
addresses
> and protocol bindings to access the referenced 
endpoint. The 
> alternatives are provided by the different 
endpoints of the
embedded
> service.
>
> It is interesting to note that in the above 
example that the 
> <wsa:address> matches the soap:address location.
> So this says to me that the <wsa:address> is essentially
equivalent
> (or at least could be) to an abstract name.
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
> Thanks,
> Tom
>
> Senior Technologist, CTO Office
> EMC²|SMARTS
> 44 South Broadway
> 7th Floor
> White Plains, NY 10601
> Office: +1-914-508-3477
> Mobile: +1-845-729-4806
> Email: maguire_tom@emc.com <mailto:maguire_tom@emc.com>
>
> If you want to build a ship, don't drum up people to
collect wood and
> don't assign them tasks and work, but rather teach them
to long for
> the endless immensity of the sea.
>
> Antoine de Saint-Exupery
>
>
--
Take care:
Dr. David Snelling < David . Snelling . UK .
Fujitsu . com >
     Fujitsu Laboratories of Europe
     Hayes Park Central
     Hayes End Road
     Hayes, Middlesex  UB4 8FE
+44-208-606-4649 (Office)
     +44-208-606-4539 (Fax)
     +44-7768-807526  (Mobile)