[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [ebxml-cppa] Re: [ebxml-msg] Comments on your Comments
OK, I added a sentance in 7.2 which points to 7.3.1.4. David. -----Original Message----- From: Arvola Chan [mailto:arvola@tibco.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 7:20 PM To: David Fischer Cc: ebXML Msg; ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [ebxml-cppa] Re: [ebxml-msg] Comments on your Comments David: I have no problem with stipulating that Errors are never sent reliably. We just have to make it clear in the 1.1 spec. The CPP/A spec should indicate that any delivery channel designated for carrying Error messages (i.e., for the action MessageError) must not specify the use of Reliable Messaging. Regards, -Arvola -----Original Message----- From: David Fischer <david@drummondgroup.com> To: Arvola Chan <arvola@tibco.com> Cc: ebXML Msg <ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org> Date: Tuesday, November 06, 2001 7:19 AM Subject: [ebxml-msg] Comments on your Comments Arvola, One of your comments was on the restriction about not having Acks on Errors. We can have Acks on Errors if we stipulate no Errors on Acks. If we want Errors on Acks then we must stipulate no Acks on Errors. If we have both, then we have the potential for endless loops. I question the need for Errors to be sent reliably. I see some significant benefit for having Errors returned on bad Acks. Regards, David Fischer Drummond Group. ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC