Hi Rhimbo,

Thank you very much for your valuable comments. Your solution is very
close to my requirements. AFAIK, WS-Addressing enables us to accomplish
this scenario in a standard way by using SOAP headers.

It is good to know someone has already done it successfully. Actually,
I feel that I'm not alone in the way of implementing asynchronous
messaging with the lack of WS-Addressing knowledge ;-)

Best regards,

Ali Sadik Kumlali

--- Rhimbo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hello Ali,
> 
> I'm sure Anne is correct!  I can't comment because I haven't used
> WS-Addressing yet.  :-)
> 
> I'll just share what I did.  Hope I understood your design problem.
> 
> I defined a "register" port name.  Clients must call this and give
> me an "application name", a "session identifier" and a URL.  These
> are all specific to our apps.  I register the URL.  When I want 
> to notify that client, I call him back on the URL he registered.
> 
> I defined the web service.  Clients must implement it.  So I know
> what port name to call, what arguments to pass.  The only thing
> is that arbitrary clients can set the URL to be the service
> end point on which they publish the service that I'll call in
> the call back.
> 
> I'm sure WS-Addressing is a better way to do it.  :-)  Something
> I need to learn!  
> 
> Vartan
> 
> 
> 
> --- Anne Thomas Manes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> > WS-Addressing.
> > 
> > On 4/27/06, Ali Sadik Kumlali <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I want to send a notification message to my clients when their
> > requests
> > > are processed and the results are ready. Then I expect them to
> call a
> > > service to acquire the results. Here is the sample scenario:
> > >
> > > server.wsdl
> > > ------------
> > > - OpenAccount
> > >     - input: OpenAccountMsg
> > >
> > > - GetOpenAccountResult
> > >     - input: GetOpenAccountResultMsg
> > >     - output: GetOpenAccountResultResponseMsg
> > >
> > > client.wsdl
> > > ------------
> > > - ResultIsReady (input only)
> > >     - input: ResultIsReadyMsg
> > >
> > >
> > >                       OpenAccountMsg (MessageId: A)
> > > Client ----------------------------------------------------->
> Server
> > >
> > >
> > >              ResultIsReadyMsg (MessageId: B, RelatesTo: A)
> > > Client <-----------------------------------------------------
> Server
> > >
> > >
> > >         GetOpenAccountResultMsg (MessageId: C, RelatesTo: A)
> > > Client ----------------------------------------------------->
> Server
> > >        <-----------------------------------------------------
> > >         GetOpenAccountResultResponseMsg (MessageId: D, RelatesTo:
> A)
> > >
> > >
> > > Here are the questions:
> > > 1) Do you see any flaw in this scenario? Or is there a common and
> > > standards based way to accomplish this kind of asynchronous
> > > communication?
> > >
> > > 2) I haven't found a good way to say my clients which service do
> they
> > > need to call for getting the results. I'm planning to put the
> name of
> > > result service name (GetOpenAccountResultMsg) in notification
> message
> > > (ResultIsReadyMsg).
> > >
> > > Could you please enlighten me? Any help would be great!
> > >
> > > Ali Sadik Kumlali
> > >
> > >
> > > __________________________________________________
> > > Do You Yahoo!?
> > > Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> > > http://mail.yahoo.com
> > >
> > 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Reply via email to