On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 10:17 PM, Raymond Feng <enjoyj...@gmail.com> wrote:
> One more thought: > > Binding extensions probably need to help create the endpoint and resolve > the endpoint references. Different bindings may even have their > implementation of the Endpoint/EndpointReference model. For those bindings > that support local wiring (for example, binding.sca), the endpoint reference > can be resolved to a local endpoint which contains information about the > component/service/binding. > > Thanks, > Raymond > > *From:* Simon Laws <simonsl...@googlemail.com> > *Sent:* Thursday, January 15, 2009 6:31 AM > *To:* dev@tuscany.apache.org > *Subject:* Re: [2.x] [DISCUSS] Endpoints > > HI Raymond > > Comments in line... > > Simon > > On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 5:45 PM, Raymond Feng <enjoyj...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Nice proposal. I agree with you on most of the points with a few >> comments: >> >> Let's first fix the model. The SCA spec uses <binding.???> element for two >> purposes: >> a) Describes a concrete transmission protocol >> b) Provides an address for the endpoint >> When we initially defined the in-memory representation of the metadata, >> the XML syntax misled us. Now we realize we should an explicit Endpoint >> model as the WSDL [1] spec does. >> >> An SCA service has an interface. Each service can be configured with >> multiple bindings and each binding binds the interface to a concrete >> transmission protocol (and message format). The service is made available at >> a set of endpoints. Each endpoint will have a binding, an address (URI) and >> the interface. >> >> service --> interface (1..1) >> service --> endpoint (1..n) >> endpoint --> binding >> --> address >> --> interface >> >> An SCA reference also has an interface. Each reference will have zero or >> more references to the endpoints (the binding, address and interface). I >> prefer to model them as EndPointReference which can be resolved to an >> Endpoint (or proxy). >> reference --> interface (1..1) >> reference --> endpoint references (1..n) >> endpoint reference --> binding >> --> address >> --> interface >> > > Ok. I see where you're going with EndpointReference. Works for me. I think > we will probably still need some link from the endpoint reference back into > the component/reference that owns it in order that the lookup part can work. > But lets model it in a bit more detail and see how it looks. Be good to get > some interaction diagrams going so we understand. > > I have yet another wiki page. Started off with just a simple diagram. > http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/TUSCANYWIKI/Endpoints. > > >> >> EndpointReference can be mapped into CallableReference and >> ServiceReference defined by the SCA java spec. It can be used to create >> proxies to an SCA service. The EndpointReference can be passed implicitly by >> the runtime or explicitly as part of the business methods. >> >> EndpointReference can be serialized into different binding protocols and >> later on be deserialized. For web service binding, it should be mapped to >> the WSA EndpointReference. >> >> The EndpointReference can be potentially used as the client entry point to >> the SCA composite. The client can create an endpoint reference with the >> information about the binding, address, interface and policies and then a >> service proxy can be created out of that. >> >> > snip.... > Certainly the resolution of an endpoint reference can be binding specific so I agree with you here. Simon
