Proposal to resolve PR26 - Soap Fault with rm-fault

[Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com>]

Proposal to Resolve Issue PR26 – Soap Fault with RM-Fault

The behaviour that an RM-Fault is returned with a soap fault in the case 
that a response
payload is not available for response reply pattern was part of the 
public review draft
cd .992. The changes suggested by Sunil would constitute a substantive 
change to the public review draft.

This behaviour works, and provides fault information separately tarteted 
for the rmp and
the producer.

However the following sentences were inadvertently removed during 
editing after
CD .992
“
If the RM-Fault encountered was due to a problem with the request header 
element, a SOAP
client fault MUST be returned. If the RM Fault encountered was due to a 
problem with processing
by the receiving RMP (including the inability to return a response due 
to Duplicate Elimination), a
soap:server fault must be returned.
“

We agreed to have section 4.5 only talk about rm faults, so the 
parenthetical statement should be removed.

Proposed Resolution:

Add the following paragraph in Line 1070 of 1.04JacquesContrib, after 
the first sentence of the bullet:
“
If the RM-Fault encountered was due to a problem with the request header 
element, a SOAP
client fault MUST be returned. If the RM Fault encountered was due to a 
problem with processing
by the receiving RMP, a soap:server fault must be returned.
“


Tom Rutt

-- 
----------------------------------------------------
Tom Rutt	email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com
Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133