Hi All,
I have gone through some of the articles on ws-addressing, but couldn't
actually figure out why ws-addressing is required ?
what I understand from ws-addressing is that using ws-addressing a
response can be addressed to some other destination. For e.g. client-A
invokes a service at Server1 and requires the response to be sent to
Client-B. ws-addressing provides the standarized <wsa:ReplyTo> MI
header to achieve this. The client client-A will send a SOAP message
with <wsa:ReplyTo> element containing the url of destination endpoint
where response is to be made, in SOAP header. The server when find
<wsa:ReplyTo> element in SOAP header, will send the response to the
specified url.
Similarly From header is to send the acknowledgement back to the sender
& FaultTo to send the fault to sender/other fault handler.
Utility of EPR's (End Point Reference) is also vague.
Is this the only scenario where ws-addressing should be implemented ?
Comments/Suggestions are welcome.
Viv
Pablo Cibraro - 22 May 2006 15:24 GMT
Hi Viv,
There are three ways to route messages to a web service,
1. SOAPAction http header: This is the most common option for web services,
but it has two main problems. The http header is not secure, so anyone can
change it and route the message to a different service. It depends on http
as transport, which is bad if you are planning to host the services on
different transports.
2. Body element in the Soap Envelope. This option uses the body element name
to route the message to the right service. You can not use this option if
the body element is encrypted with message security.
3. Addressing headers. In my opinion, it is best option. The headers can be
signed so nobody can change them and they do not have dependencies with an
specific transport.
Does it make sense ?.
Regards,
Pablo Cibraro
http://weblogs.asp.net/cibrax
> Hi All,
> I have gone through some of the articles on ws-addressing, but couldn't
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
>
> Viv