Re: [ws-rx] Proposed new issue: spec talks about delivery assurances butdoes not clearly relate them to the protocol

[Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>]

+1 to 'a' and 'b'.  I'm concerned
that adding another deliverable will slow us down and I think we could
probably add the right text to the WS-RM Policy spec.
thanks
-Doug

"Stefan Batres" <stefanba@microsoft.com>

09/26/2005 01:04 PM

To	<ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>
cc
Subject	[ws-rx] Proposed new issue: spec talks about delivery assurances but does not clearly relate them to the protocol

Description:
The WS-ReliableMessaging specification
talks about delivery assurances but does not clearly relate them to the
protocol.
 
Justification:
This vague definition of the relationship
between delivery assurances and the protocol has caused (extreme) confusion
and does not clearly describe how the protocol is intended to be used.
 
Proposals:
One proposal that has been kicked around
by the TC consists of:

a)     Remove all references to delivery assurances from the WS-RM spec.

b)     Describe, in detail, DA’s in the policy spec (since we’re adding an Assurances element to that document anyway).

c)      Create a new deliverable for the TC; a profiles document. The profiles would describe how the protocol should be used to implement the various delivery assurances.
Other variants on this have been proposed as well. The point is to make it more obvious that DA’s are a contract between RMS/RMD and apps whereas the protocol is about guaranteed transfer between RMS and RMD and enables the implementation of DA’s between RMS/RMD and apps.
 
Comments?
 
--Stefan