RE: [ws-rx] Proposal to resolve Issue 006

["Abbie Barbir" <abbieb@nortel.com>]

+1
abbie

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marc Goodner [mailto:mgoodner@microsoft.com] 
> Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2005 3:07 PM
> To: tom@coastin.com; wsrx
> Subject: RE: [ws-rx] Proposal to resolve Issue 006
> 
> 
> +1 that there is no need for this capability.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Rutt [mailto:tom@coastin.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 2:29 PM
> To: wsrx
> Subject: [ws-rx] Proposal to resolve Issue 006
> 
> Description
> 
>                 Is there a requirement that the sender can 
> assert that 
> the receiver must
>                 deliver a particular reliability assurance on a given 
> sequence?
> 
> Discussion          
> 
> It has been agreed that the protocol is the same on any ws 
> -rm Sequence,
> 
> regardless of DA level agreements in place between RMD and 
> Destination 
> Application.    There is no need to have a standard protocol 
> mechanism 
> for the RMS to signal DA requirments on the sequence for the RMD.
> 
> If reliaiblity policy is attached to a destination endpoint 
> at a finer 
> level of granularity than endpoint subject level,  an implementaton 
> (extension beyond normal conformance) would have to use means outside 
> the scope of this standard to convey such requirements (e.g., 
> RMD could 
> be aware of the wsdl description).
> 
> Proposed resolution to Issue 006:
> 
> close issue with no changes to specfication.
> 
> 
> -- 
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Tom Rutt	email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com
> Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133
> 
> 
> 
>