Re: [ws-rx] PR26 - Retransmission

[Paul Fremantle <paul@wso2.com>]

+1 from me.

Paul

Matthew Lovett wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> The current proposal for PR26 reads as follows:
>
> 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.
>
> I don't think that is quite right. Using a lowercase must doesn't seem to 
> help much, and an uppercase MUST would be too strong. (Consider a device 
> with limited storage, they might be happy to retransmit messages up to 
> some limit, but need to recover storage after that point. There are plenty 
> of other impl choices that don't like this MUST too.)
>
> How about the following alternative:
>
> Add a new invariant:
> While the Sequence is not closed or terminated, the RM Source SHOULD 
> retransmit any messages that are missing from the most recent 
> acknowledgement message.
>
> The editors may wish to play with the trailing part of the sentence, to 
> cope with the permutations of Acks/Nacks, and the definition of 'most 
> recent', but I don't think that is the core of the issue. I think the 
> SHOULD makes the common impl choice clear, without forcing implementers 
> into a corner.
>
> Note that this proposal basically matches the point that we got to on the 
> last call. I hope that most people are able to accept it.
>
> Thanks
>
> Matt
>
>
>   

-- 
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