Few confusing things about reliable sessions RRS feed

  • Question

  • hi

    a) "When reliable session is over TCP-S, the TCP session is tied to the reliable session and, as such, transport security ensures that security is also tied to the reliable session. In this case, connection re-establishment is turned off."

    What is meant by connection re-establishement being turned off? Perhaps that if TCP connection is ungracefully terminated, that reliable session won't automatically try to reestablish the connection, while if reliable session was running on top of some non-TCP  transport protocol, it might also try to re-establish a connection?

    b) "A reliable session is secured by binding it to a security context that is represented and managed by a security session channel. The only exception is when using HTTPS. The Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) session is not bound to the reliable session."

    So reliable session needs to be bound to a security session channel in order to be secured? But since it can't be bound to SSL, how then is reliable session secured when using HTTPS?

    c) Do reliable session and underlying transport sessions ( such as TCP session ) both use same SessionID value?


    a) Does reliable session RS ensure end-to-end message transfer reliability only if intermediaries ( which may forward the messages over different transport protocol ) also understand RS protocol, or is reliable session applied directly to the SOAP message ( ie is embedded inside the message) and as such works even if intermediaries don't know anything about RS?

    b) One of reliable session's benefits is that it provides end-to-end message transfer reliability. But doesn't security session ( such as security session used with WsHttpBinding at Message security level and EstablishSecurityContext =True ) also provide for basic end-to-end realibility in a sense that if underlying connection is ungracefully terminated and re-established, security session can also be re-established, since security session is embedded directly inside the messages?

    Thank you

    Friday, January 28, 2011 5:40 PM