Deepal, I think the VOTE is clear at this point. We need to switch them off by default.
thanks, dims On 1/1/06, Deepal Jayasinghe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi Paul; > > yes , you are correct , in the server side session should be specify by some > one , but in the client side it depends. > > In the current implementation that I have done , if the server send the > cookie I copy that to serverconetxt , and when sending request I check > whether the cookie id is there in the server context if its there I write > that else ignore that. > > If client think that he does not want then it should be able to turn that > off (say using some property in options) , else we send the cookie back. > > With Sanjiva's new client approach this can handle in nice way , so my idea > is in the client side there should be a default session and it should be > transport session. > > > Thanks, > Deepal > ................................................................ > ~Future is Open~ > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Paul Fremantle > To: axis-dev@ws.apache.org > Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 1:29 PM > Subject: Re: [VOTE] [Axis2] Sessions on by default? > > I know I'm late :) > > Here are my views: > > 1) Server sessions should be enabled by actual specific action of a > developer or deployer > > 2) Client sessions should be enabled by the following model: > a) If the programmer repeatedly uses the same instance of the same stub > then sessions will be *possible*. > b) Only if the server uses HTTP cookies or WS-A reference params the > session will be *actual*. > > i.e. for a session to take place, the consumer has to program in a certain > way AND the provider has to enable sessions. > > Paul > > > > On 12/31/05, Dennis Sosnoski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote: > > > > >The question Dims asked is about what the default should be for clients. > > >I disagree with the apparently popular choice of no sessions because if > > >a service has multiple operations then in most cases the operations have > > >some relationships between them. The question really amounts to asking > > >how often do people have session scoped services vs. application scoped > > >services. If they are application scoped then basically the cookie stuff > > >makes no difference: either the service is totally stateless and it > > >ignores all context or its truly stateful and remembers something from > > >every request. > > > > > >IMO the natural behavior should be to maintain sessions by default. > > >That's what even Apache SOAP did back many years ago. > > > > > > > > I'll vote +1 on "no sessions by default" for now, just to keep things > > simple. > > > > That said, does WSDL 2.0 include a way to indicate service statefulness? > > If so, that would be the ideal way of controlling the client defaults. > > If not... well, is it too late to get a new feature in, Sanjiva? ;-) > > > > - Dennis > > > > > > -- > Paul Fremantle > VP/Technology, WSO2 and OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair > > http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com > -- Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/
