FW: [wsrm] Are Relays out of scope?

-----Original Message-----
From: Freund, Robert 
Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 5:08 PM
To: ''; Furniss, Peter
Cc: wsrm
Subject: RE: [wsrm] Are Relays out of scope?


Actually, it is defined explicitly in the requirements that WS-RM is an end to end protocol.
Of course, this does not prevent the construction of a man in the middle agent that will operate transparently with respect to both sender and receiver.
-bob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Rutt [mailto:]
> Sent: Monday, December 01, 2003 4:33 PM
> To: Furniss, Peter
> Cc: wsrm
> Subject: [wsrm] Are Relays out of scope?
> 
> 
> Furniss, Peter wrote:
> 
> >Tom,
> >
> >Don't waste time on heretics like me :-)
> >
> >I don't think a store-and-forward relay is an intermediary 
> in the soap
> >sense. It's obviously an intermediary in a message queueing 
> sense, but I
> >would think it was an important (no, vital) element for some 
> use cases.
> >What if the real sending application and the real receiving 
> application
> >are never up at the same time ?  Or is that ruled out of scope by the
> >intermediaries discussion.  If it is, apologies for wasting 
> your time.
> >
> >Peter
> >
> >  
> >
> I think our idea of not dealing explicitly with 
> intermediaries means it 
> is an end to end protocol.
> 
> I send this to the list to see if anyone disagrees with my 
> assessment of 
> the relay situation.
> 
> Tom Rutt
> WSRM chair
> 
> -- 
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Tom Rutt		email: ; 
> Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from 
> the roster of the OASIS TC), go to 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leav
> e_workgroup.php.
> 
>