RE: [Fwd: Proposals to address SOAPAction header]

["Morin, Gary" <gmm@cottageland.net>]

We are going to put this to a vote at the AIAG Message Routing Meeting on
Thursday June 21 but the recomendation of all of the members I have canvased
so far is "B" (Use of SOAPAction is deprecated).  I'll post offical
recomendation after the meeting.

  -- Gary


> -----Original Message-----
> From: christopher ferris [mailto:chris.ferris@east.sun.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2001 12:20 PM
> To: ebXML Transport (E-mail)
> Subject: [Fwd: Proposals to address SOAPAction header]
> 
> 
> FYI, from the xml-dist-app list.
> 
> FWIW, I supported proposal B (below), to deprecate the SOAPAction
> HTTP header.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Chris
> 
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: Proposals to address SOAPAction header
> Resent-Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 09:42:52 -0400 (EDT)
> Resent-From: xml-dist-app@w3.org
> Date: Thu, 7 Jun 2001 06:42:20 -0700
> From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@akamai.com>
> To: XML Distributed Applications List <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
> 
> The W3C XML Protocol Working Group is attempting to address perceived
> and reported problems with the "SOAPAction" mechanism in the HTTP
> binding (see SOAP 1.1 Section 6.1.1 [1]). As part of this process,
> the WG wishes to solicit comments and guidence on two proposals it
> has generated, as below.
> 
> Comments must go to xmlp-comments@w3.org by 2001-06-18, and should
> address the proposals as they sit, and may optionally make general
> comments on resolution of issues with SOAPAction. Those representing
> the positions of particular groups or organisations are requested to 
> clearly identify themselves as such. The WG encourages additional   
> discussion on the xml-dist-app@w3.org mailing list.
> 
> Neither of the following options precludes equivalent functionality
> elsewhere.
> 
> Proposal A:
> Use of SOAPAction is discouraged. SOAPAction is an optional part of
> XMLP, supported but not required. Services MAY require SOAPAction and
> any software wishing to access those services MUST be able to send   
> it.
> 
> Proposal B:
> Use of SOAPAction is deprecated. Senders SHOULD NOT send SOAPAction.
> Receivers MUST NOT accept or reject messages on the basis of the
> presense, absence, or value of the SOAPAction header.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Mark Nottingham
> for the W3C XML Protocol Working Group
> 
> 
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/SOAP/#_Toc478383528
> 
> 
> -- 
> Mark Nottingham, Research Scientist
> Akamai Technologies (San Mateo, CA USA)
>