ws-rx message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] proposal to address issue 140
- From: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
- To: "Bob Freund-Hitachi" <bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>
- Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 11:21:05 -0400
Bob,
for InvalidAck - should it really
close the sequence? Since Acks are just informational I'm not so
sure they should initiate the closing down of a sequence even when they
have bad data - I'd prefer to let the receiver of the InvalidAck fault
make that decision for itself ( see 5.1.3).
for seqClosed - I don't think
the "action upon receipt" should be to terminate - I think 'close'
would be more appropriate.
btw - there were changes to the expires
text in the pdf - I'm assuming those were left over from other other work
and not related to this, right?
-Doug
"Bob Freund-Hitachi"
<bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>
07/27/2006 05:59 AM
|
To
| "[WS-RX]" <ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
| [ws-rx] proposal to address issue 140 |
|
Anish has been kind enough to prepare the
attached draft proposal to address issue 140.
While preparing this draft, some additional
points were raised which we enumerate below:
Sequence Terminated Fault:
There is no text that details under what
conditions a sequence terminated fault might be raised other than mention
of a vague “protocol error”.
One way to address this is to list some or
all of the conditions in section 4, however it is more concise to represent
these in the state tables of appendix D were normative.
Unsupported Selection
This fault description deserves elucidation
Thanks
-bob[attachment "wsrm-1.1-spec-wd-15-issue140.pdf"
deleted by Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM]
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]