Re: The deep difference between request/response and fire-and-forget

[email protected]
Newsgroups gmane.text.xml.distributed
Message-ID <OF0C22B31B.792EA2C5-ON852570F5.0009EA5D-852570F5.000A49E3@lotus.com>
Rich Salz writes:

> Yes, my comments were only about TCP/IP, and as a generalization I don't 
disagree with you. 

Good.  I agree that we agree.

> I do disagree that it's worth standardizng MEPs that don't 
> leverage the common case in favor of general abstractions, however.

We seem to be on a course of standardizing:

* Request/response:  neither request nor response is optional, but the 
envelope is optional in the response.

* (probably) one way fire-n-forget

* Response only: as in SOAP 1.2, to model WebMethod=GET

I think that fits pretty well with standardizing common cases, at least as 
seen by applications.  If we can indeed support fire-n-forget on HTTP in 
particular, so be it, but we'll have to figure out who decides that it's 
not request/response, and what is actually done after the message is 
sent/received.  I still feel it's not particularly good practice to just 
close a socket after you receive an HTTP request, unless there's been some 
unrecoverable error.  In general, I think HTTP wants you to respond with 
some status code.  That's why I think the first MEP above is the right fit 
to HTTP, even if you have nothing more than a status code to signal that 
no more elaborate response is coming.

--------------------------------------
Noah Mendelsohn 
IBM Corporation
One Rogers Street
Cambridge, MA 02142
1-617-693-4036
--------------------------------------








Rich Salz <[email protected]>
01/12/06 06:23 PM
 
        To:     "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
        cc:     "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
        Subject:        Re: The deep difference between request/response 
and fire-and-forget


Yes, my comments were only about TCP/IP, and as a generalization I don't
disagree with you.  I do disagree that it's worth standardizng MEPs that
don't leverage the common case in favor of general abstractions, however.

                 /r$

-- 
SOA Appliance Group
IBM Application Integration Middleware
* This address is going away; please use [email protected] *
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.