[Pgi-wg] Sec: Agreement on WS-Naming (ref by strawman)

[Aleksandr Konstantinov]

On Friday 20 March 2009 12:24, Morris Riedel wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> >-  As I
> >-explained in an earlier mail, "limited" here means that the PGI profile
> >-shall precisely described in a self-contained way the minimum set of EPR
> >-elements which must be supported by conforming inplementations.
> 
> So far, I guess we only depend on the wsa:To element of the specification
> with the URI making it the minimum element of it.
> 
> With WS-Naming this would be expanded using wsa:metadata and ws-naming
> elements of course.
> 
> Isn't our usual procedure to take the URI - encode an EPR (with wsa:To) and
> send it to the BES systems? Or is this maybe only my narrow UNICORE view of
> how we do it?
> 
> Q: What is meant by accessing a CREAM-BES and A-REX with URI (instead of
> EPRs)?

ARC does not rely on EPR present in SOAP messages header sent to BES service.
ARC clients do put EPRs into headers for compatibility. 
Hosting environment of ARC services may perform routing of messages depending
on wsa:To element of EPR.
To make it short - we can live with and without EPRs.
AFAIR BES specs say nothing about if BES service has to be contacted using EPRs.



A.K.