[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: Editorial messages have to be received forthem to be examined:
Bob, "Accept" probably needs a definition tied with our new "discard" term. Does "accept" mean exactly the opposite of "discard"? Either define it or use "not discard" and similar wording. Separately, in your "[NEW ISSUE] Rollover underspecified, state of sequence is unclear" thread, you seem to argue for a new Sequence state distinct from[1] non-existent (RMD unaware), active (RMD aware and accepting), closed (RMD aware but not accepting), and terminated (RMD unaware, has this been folded back into non-existent?). That is, a new state in which only the missing messages in a gap-filled Sequence are accepted. The text below does not allow for such a state. Do I understand correctly? thanx, doug [1] my apologies for all incorrect names, I haven't grokked the latest state tables yet On 26/06/06 11:44, Bob Freund-Hitachi wrote: > > In WD 15 Section 302 “Closing a Sequence” it states starting on line 428: > > > > “If the RM Source wishes to close the Sequence, then it sends a > CloseSequence element, in the body of > > a message, to the RM Destination. This message indicates that the RM > Destination MUST NOT receive > > any new messages for the specified Sequence, other than those already > received at the time the > > CloseSequence element is interpreted by the RM Destination. Upon > receipt of this message, or > > subsequent to the RM Destination closing the Sequence of its own > volition, the RM Destination MUST > > include a final SequenceAcknowledgement (within which the RM > Destination MUST include the Final > > element) header block on any messages associated with the Sequence > destined to the RM Source, > > including the CloseSequenceResponse message or on any Sequence fault > transmitted to the RM Source. > > While the RM Destination MUST NOT receive any new messages for the > specified Sequence it MUST still > > process RM protocol messages. For example, it MUST respond to > AckRequested, TerminateSequence > > as well as CloseSequence messages. Note, subsequent CloseSequence > messages have no effect on the > > state of the Sequence. > > > > In the case where the RM Destination wishes to discontinue use of a > Sequence it is RECOMMENDED > > that it close the Sequence. Please see Final and the SequenceClosed > fault. Whenever possible the > > SequenceClosed fault SHOULD be used in place of the SequenceTerminated > fault, whenever > > possible, to allow the RM Source to still receive Acknowledgements. > > ” > > > > All messages that reach the RM Destination are received, if they were > not then this language would be unnecessary. > > > > I suggest that we use the word “accept” in these cases as in the > proposal below in addition to a few editorial nits: > > changes are highlighted in yellow > > > > “If the RM Source wishes to close the Sequence, then it sends a > CloseSequence element, in the body of > > a message, to the RM Destination. This element indicates that the RM > Destination MUST NOT accept > > any new messages for the specified Sequence, other than those already > accepted at the time the > > CloseSequence element is interpreted by the RM Destination. Upon > receipt of this element, or > > subsequent to the RM Destination closing the Sequence of its own > volition, the RM Destination MUST > > include a final SequenceAcknowledgement (within which the RM > Destination MUST include the Final > > element) header block on any messages associated with the Sequence > destined to the RM Source, > > including the CloseSequenceResponse element or on any Sequence fault > transmitted to the RM Source. > > While the RM Destination MUST NOT accept any new messages for the > specified Sequence it MUST still > > process messages containing RM protocol elements. For example, it MUST > respond to AckRequested, TerminateSequence > > as well as CloseSequence elements. Note, subsequent CloseSequence > elements have no effect on the > > state of the Sequence. > > > > In the case where the RM Destination wishes to discontinue use of a > Sequence it is RECOMMENDED > > that it close the Sequence. Please see Final and the SequenceClosed > fault. Whenever possible the > > SequenceClosed fault SHOULD be used in place of the SequenceTerminated > fault, whenever > > possible, to allow the RM Source to still process Acknowledgements.” >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]