[Nsi-wg] Some questions/remarks on the v2 connection wsdl

[Henrik Thostrup Jensen]

On Wed, 12 Dec 2012, John MacAuley wrote:

> I had an internal discussion here in Ottawa with my dogs on this exact 
> topic a few months ago when I defined the header.

:-)

> We argued for both including and excluding the version field within the 
> header.  What swayed me to include it was the concept that if we removed 
> SOAP from the equation, and wanted to continue using the XML schema, 
> then a header with version number let the protocol contents exist 
> independent of the SOAP action.

OK, that at least makes sense. However a new protocol will probably mean 
changes anyway, as the current messaging scheme as highly based on RPC. 
Also, in some protocols, say HTTP, this is handled with mime-types.

Is there are a urn for what the value should be?

> Additionally, the HTTP SOAP action field if 100% optional and I only 
> provided it in the SOAP binding to make it easier for .NET clients to 
> use (Microsoft requires the action field by default).

>From section 6.1.1 in SOAP 1.1 spec:

"An HTTP client MUST use this header field when issuing a SOAP HTTP 
Request."


     Best regards, Henrik

  Henrik Thostrup Jensen <htj at nordu.net>
  Software Developer, NORDUnet