[ogsa-hpcp-wg] MS HPCBasicProfile Web Service

[Christopher Smith]

Can I be clear on something?

Instead of:

    https://aristotle.dreadnought.org:9090

You want:

    <wsa:EndpointReference xmlns:wsa="http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing">
        <wsa:Address>https://aristotle.dreadnought.org:9090</wsa:Address>
    </wsa:EndpointReference>

... for my endpoint, at any rate. I'm guessing that yours will require me to
set some SOAP header blocks based on the WS-Addressing SOAP binding. I had
hoped to avoid this detail for now....

By the way ... it's not anonymous https ... we are authenticating the server
with SSL.

-- Chris


On 14/10/06 10:47, "Peter G. Lane" <lane at mcs.anl.gov> wrote:

> Michel Drescher wrote:
>> All,
>> 
>> Peter G. Lane wrote:
>>> Let me elaborate on why I need EPRs to be a requirement. Our
>>> implementation will be a stateful service with a static state resource
>>> for each resource manager that we interact with on the back end (i.e.
>>> fork/exec, PBS, LSF, Condor, ...). What this means is that you have to
>>> have a resource reference that cannot be obtained from the WSDL in order
>>> for our service dispatcher to know what state resource is associated
>>> with a particular CreateActivity (or any other BES-Factory operation)
>>> call. This is what EPRs are primarily good for. I realize stateless
>>> services don't need it, but if EPRs aren't supported then there's no
>>> realistic way we can participate seeing as thought we'd have to rewrite
>>> GRAM to, I guess, only do fork/exec. I know .Net has support for EPRs
>>> (heck, Microsoft was a coauthor for the WS-Addressing spec!), so I don't
>>> see this as a huge burden. And as I said before, we are assuming EPRs
>>> for the Activity references, so it's a bit puzzling that anybody would
>>> use anything else for the factory.
>> 
>> I strongly support Peter here on requiring EPRs.
>> 
>> It really shouldn't be that difficult to define a simple (I mean
>> *really* simple!) factory WSDL having one method with no input that
>> returns exactly one EPR. Agreeing on a transport binding shouldn't be
>> that difficult either, shouldn't it?
> 
> Not to look a gift horse in the mouth, but why are you suggesting a method to
> retrieve the EPR? I'd
> still need an EPR to call an operation that returns the service's EPR, so it
> doesn't make much sense
> to me. If there's no discovery mechanism, then I'd suggest just writing the
> EPR to a log file and
> distributing it from that.
> 
> As for a transport binding, I thought we already agreed on anonymous https.
> 
> Peter
> 
>> 
>> Implementing that factory should be a finger excercise.
>> 
>> Problem solved?
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Michel
>> 
> 
> --
>   ogsa-hpcp-wg mailing list
>   ogsa-hpcp-wg at ogf.org
>   http://www.ogf.org/mailman/listinfo/ogsa-hpcp-wg