Re: more on the FW: Draft RegRep and TRP transport harmonization

[Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM <mwsachs@us.ibm.com>]

Farrukh,

I hadn't given much thought, in the ebXML context, to synchronous messaging
but given the ubiquity of HTTP, it seems to me that the messaging service
has to support synchronous messaging.

The IBM tpaML proposal states that if an action is defined as synchronous
(invocation="syncOnly"), that action can only be used with a transport that
supports returning the response on the same connection as the request.  Of
the transports supported in tpaML, only HTTP meets this requirement.  It
also points out that the application can emulate synchronous operation by
blocking until the response arrives. The IBM Research team considered, but
quickly dismissed, the idea of providing for the runtime to emulate
synchronous operation over other transports.

I'm not familiar with the IBM implementation mentioned below but I would
expect that SOAP over SMTP means one-way messages only.

Regards,
Marty

*************************************************************************************

Martin W. Sachs
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
P. O. B. 704
Yorktown Hts, NY 10598
914-784-7287;  IBM tie line 863-7287
Notes address:  Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM
Internet address:  mwsachs @ us.ibm.com
*************************************************************************************



Farrukh Najmi <Farrukh.Najmi@east.sun.com> on 09/19/2000 05:03:39 PM

To:   Nicholas Kassem <Nick.Kassem@eng.sun.com>
cc:   Rik Drummond <rvd2@worldnet.att.net>, Farrukh Najmi
      <Farrukh.Najmi@east.sun.com>, Ebxml Transport
      <ebxml-transport@lists.ebxml.org>, ebxml repository
      <ebxml-regrep@lists.ebxml.org>
Subject:  Re: more on the FW: Draft RegRep and TRP transport harmonization




Nick,

The only area where I feel synchronous messaging makes sense in RS is for
supporting object querying. Think a user pressing a button in a GUI that
lets
them browse and drill down to view managed objects in the registry. Such
interaction tend to be synchronous. That said you know better than any one
else
that I am a strong proponent of ebXML TRP and in fact put the mandatory use
of
ebXML TRP Messaging in RS client to RS communication near line 1 of the RS
spec.

Yes I know there are ways to make back end async activity appear to be
synchronous to the GUI user. However, I have been under the assumption that
ebXML TRP Messaging supports both synch and async request. In fact I
believe it
is specified simply in the TPA as a request attribute. I realize that makes
using mail as a transport more difficult (not impossible). case an point is
IBM
SOAP implementation supports mail as a transport.

I thought this was a good opportunity to dispel the myth that ebXML TRP
does
not support sync communication and is allegedly not suitable for RS client
to
RS communication.

Let me know if you or other friends in TRP find any mistakes in my
thinking.

--

Regards,
Farrukh

Nicholas Kassem wrote:

> As a follow-up and wearing a POC hat on the key issue isn't whether ebXML
> TR&P supports async/sync interaction models at the transport level but
what
> specifically in RS makes it a service precluding it from being used by
say
> a mail-enabled client ?
>
> I thought we were specifying ebXML services in a transport neutral way -
> did that change at some point ? Perhaps this is more appropriate for the
RR
> list but thanks for any clarification.
>
> Regards,
> Nick
>
> At 01:05 PM 9/19/2000 -0700, Nicholas Kassem wrote:
> >At 11:58 PM 9/18/2000 -0500, Rik Drummond wrote:
> >>rr needs synch services as noted below from trp.  best regards, rik
> ..snip

--
Regards,
Farrukh