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] PR Issue 22: concrete proposal


Doug,
 
W/respect to LastMsgNumber in CloseSequence; I can see your point. I wouldn't object if you ammended our proposal to include LasMsgNumber in CloseSequence.
 
W/respect to TerminateSequence being required; if you ammend our proposal to optionally include LasMsgNumber in CloseSequence, then the requirement to always send TerminateSequence would go away. Clearly if the CS message contains LastMsgNumber then the RMD will have enough information to determine if it received all the messages in the sequence.
 
- gp


From: Doug Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 10:10 AM
To: Gilbert Pilz
Cc: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] PR Issue 22: concrete proposal


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]