Re: [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: anonymous AcksTo

David Orchard wrote:

<snip/>

> 
> This solves the problem, that the MEP isn't transformed from a one-way
> into a two-way.
> 
> Personally, I think the anonymous IRI is actually inappropriate for this
> case.  The WS-Addressing working group is probably (or has?) added
> another special name for "not allowed".  Imagine that a ReplyTo has
> "not-allowed" value which really clearly says it's a one-way mep, and
> then there's an anonymous ackTo.
> 
> I'd suggest a friendly mod to Proposal 2 to say call out a "not allowed"
> IRI in the AcksTo.  It might also need a bit more to say that
> "anonymous" IRI is not allowed when MEP is one-way.
> 

To follow up on this, WS-Addressing has defined a "not allowed" IRI:
"http://www.w3.org/@@@@/@@/addressing/none" [1]


[1] 
http://dev.w3.org/cvsweb/~checkout~/2004/ws/addressing/ws-addr-core.html?content-type=text/html;%20charset=utf-8