[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Issue 26: retransmission
Issue 26 -----Original Message----- From: Paul Fremantle [mailto:paul@wso2.com] Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 3:40 PM To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: retransmission We do not normatively state that any messages must be retransmitted unless the server Nacks them. Since the Protocol Invariants are there to explain how we actually ensure reliable transmission, that is the appropriate place to add this. Proposal: Add a new invariant: While the Sequence is not closed or terminated, the RMS must retransmit any messages that are missing from the most recent acknowledgement message. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [ws-rx] Potential new issue: retransmission Date: Wed, 01 Nov 2006 12:22:25 +0000 From: Paul Fremantle <paul@wso2.com> Organisation: WSO2 To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org <ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org> While looking at PR016, I could only find three places where we normatively define retransmission: 1. Upon receipt of a NACK, you must retransmit that message 2. Upon MessageNumberRollover, you must continue to retransmit messages 3. In the state tables, we have a state corresponding to this. Given that NACK is optional, MessageNumberRollover highly unlikely, doesn't seem like we've defined this very well! How about adding as a protocol invariant that the RMS must retransmit unacknowledged messages? Paul -- Paul Fremantle VP/Technology and Partnerships, WSO2 OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle paul@wso2.com (646) 290 8050 "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com -- Paul Fremantle VP/Technology and Partnerships, WSO2 OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle paul@wso2.com (646) 290 8050 "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]