OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

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


I was trying to not say the same thing twice -- potential for 
inconsistency as we go forward and make other changes to the spec before 
it is final. So I have a pointer in section 3.4 to the right fault.

-Anish
--

Doug Davis wrote:
> 
> Anish,
>   Ah, so you meant to erase the text around message # rollover fault 
> (sec 3.4).  I think we should keep it there even though its a dup of 
> what's in section 4.
> -Doug
> 
> 
> 
> *Anish Karmarkar <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>*
> 
> 07/27/2006 03:01 PM
> 
> 	
> To
> 	Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
> cc
> 	Bob Freund-Hitachi <bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>, "[WS-RX]" 
> <ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Subject
> 	Re: [ws-rx] proposal to address issue 140
> 
> 
> 	
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Doug Davis wrote:
>  >
>  > 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).
> 
> Yes, I see your point about seq spoofing. Agree.
> 
>  >   for seqClosed - I don't think the "action upon receipt" should be to
>  > terminate - I think 'close' would be more appropriate.
>  >
> 
> Makes sense.
> 
>  > 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?
>  >
> 
> Not sure which changes you are talking about.
> The only changes are in section 4 and in section 3.4.
> Note that the PDF uses WD-15 as the base.
> 
>  > -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]