7159 2009-07-28 23:37:29 +0000 Eventing lies about sending faults 2009-09-16 08:00:29 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified WS-Resource Access Eventing FPWD PC Windows XP CLOSED REMIND hasProposal P2 normal --- 1 dug dug public-ws-resource-access-notifications oldest_to_newest 26107 0 dug 2009-07-28 23:37:29 +0000 ws-eventing says: All fault messages defined in this specification MUST be sent according to the rules described in WS-Addressing section 4. They are sent to the [fault endpoint], if present and valid. Otherwise they are sent to the [reply endpoint] if present. If neither is present faults may be sent to the [source endpoint]. This duplicates WS-Addressing, is technically wrong w.r.t the source endpoint and we can't mandate that faults are sent - just transmitted. Proposal: Remove this paragraph. 26109 1 dug 2009-07-28 23:44:29 +0000 actually, its worse, the next paragraph has this: Endpoints compliant with this specification MUST include required message information headers on all fault messages. Fault messages are correlated as replies using the [relationship] property as defined in WS-Addressing. which should be removed too. WS-Transfer uses this text: All fault messages defined in this specification MUST be sent according to the rules and usage described in WS-Addressing 1.0 SOAP Binding Section 6 for encoding SOAP 1.1 and SOAP 1.2 faults. which we could use if people really wanted to have something. Either way, we should make all WSRA specs consistent with whatever we decide. 26245 2 bob 2009-08-05 17:40:45 +0000 resolved with: WS-Transfer uses this text: All fault messages defined in this specification MUST be sent according to the rules and usage described in WS-Addressing 1.0 SOAP Binding Section 6 for encoding SOAP 1.1 and SOAP 1.2 faults.