ws-rx message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] PR Issue 22: concrete proposal
- From: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
- To: "Gilbert Pilz" <gpilz@bea.com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 13:09:31 -0500
Gil,
If we head this route I'd like
to see a LastMsgNumber on the Close as well so that we don't need to wait
for a TerminateSequence before we can know the final outcome of the Sequence
- w.r.t. what we can deliver to the app (ie. incompleteSeqBehvaior). This
would mean that either Close or Terminate would be required based on certain
IncompletSeqBehavior values.
Also, on TerminateSequence being
required....what does that mean w.r.t. enforcement? Can we enforce
it? What happens if it not sent? Seems like its only really required
for "DiscardEntireSequence" values of IncompleteSeqBehavior,
all others can still do their job w/o it, no? Would it not make more
sense to say that its required only when needed by this flag to do its
job?
thanks
-Doug
"Gilbert Pilz"
<gpilz@bea.com>
10/26/2006 03:48 PM
|
To
| <ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
| [ws-rx] PR Issue 22: concrete proposal |
|
Attached is a proposal for PR i022 in the form of
a diff against CD-04.
The main points are:
1.) wsrm:TerminateSequence has been expanded to include a mandatory
LastMsgNumber element the value of which is, surprisingly enough, the
number of the last message in the Sequence.
2.) Sending wsrm:TerminateSequence is now mandatory; basically the whole
thing won't hold together unless the RMS is required to send a
wsrm:TerminateSequence.
<<wsrm-1.1-spec-pr-i022.pdf>>
[attachment "wsrm-1.1-spec-pr-i022.pdf" deleted by Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM]
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]