On 6/3/07, Eran Chinthaka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Hi Amila, Can you please explain what this issue is? Our current addressing code passed all the test case during the last interop. IIRC, there were tests to see whether we understand those required properties (please see defined set of problems in [1]).
First of all I should apologise you If I mean any thing bad about addressing. Sorry I really can't remember the case and if so I would have log a jira. may be my configuration problem. Actually In the first mail I wanted to write "some times we might get " but I had written it as "some times we get" (you know my writing, once again sorry for that.) and propose this (which came to my mind at that time) as a precautionary step. So I assume we are good in terms of the spec. yes I think as well. We can not simply change
something because MSFT is doing that or any other company is doing that. I hate doing so.
100% agree. I propose this not because MSFT is doing this. but I saw some advantage of doing this in terms of fixing our bugs early as possible (once again this does not mean addressing has bugs). That is why is I think davids' solution is fair enough. For example, when we send a request with ReplyTo set to
NONE, one implementation was sending the response using the same channel that we use to send the request, which is completely wrong.If you want
I can give you some more examples that some of the companies were doing
without adhering to the specs. So please explain what the problem is and if it is something that we are doing wrong then let's fix it. You will have to point to the spec and not to any proprietary implementation please. Thanks, Eran Chinthaka [1] : http://www.w3.org/TR/ws-addr-soap/#soapfaults Amila Suriarachchi wrote: > hi, > Currently, the must understand property of the addressing headers do not > set for the > required addressing headers. There is no problem with this, since there > is no compulsory requirement for that. > But MS implementation of WS* (WSF) set these attributes. > Therefore sometimes we get interop issues when processing the must > understand properties. So setting > must understand property true within the Axis2 would resolve these > incompatibility issues easily. > > So shall we switch on the must understand property for all the required > addressing headers if there is no > reason for not to do so. > I think it is better to do the same thing for rampart and sandesha too. > > if we decide to do so can someone go ahead and do the changes since I am not > much familiar with the addressing. > > thanks, > Amila. > > > -- > Amila Suriarachchi, > WSO2 Inc. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFGYhrdjON2uBzUhh8RAlwpAJ4zToh2QACxCRoT/ByHVIwvO6rkmACfT65u WDsFB1pmShG43jf2VvIBj7M= =uGgM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Amila Suriarachchi, WSO2 Inc.
