RE: [ws-tx] Issue 008 - WS-C: Remove fault 4.6 AlreadyRegistered

["Sazi Temel" <sazi@bea.com>]

I also see e-mails that refer other e-mails that I don't see in the
list... I think some of the e-mails are not making the list for some
reason...

.Sazi

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter Furniss [mailto:peter.furniss@choreology.com] 
Sent: Thursday, December 15, 2005 8:25 AM
To: 'Max Feingold'; ws-tx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [ws-tx] Issue 008 - WS-C: Remove fault 4.6
AlreadyRegistered

I'm forwarding this back to the list - for some reason it doesn't seem
to have
been propagated by ws-tx@lists.oasis-open.org or copied to the archive.

Another message from Max on 013 suffered the same fate, but that is
copied in full
in Sazi's response to it (he was also on the cc: list)

There was at least one message, from Rich Salz, that also suffered this
way.
Are there others ?

Peter

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Max Feingold [mailto:Max.Feingold@microsoft.com] 
> Sent: 15 December 2005 00:57
> To: Peter Furniss; ws-tx@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [ws-tx] Issue 008 - WS-C: Remove fault 4.6 
> AlreadyRegistered
> 
> 
> I should make one clarification here...
> 
> My understanding of the AlreadyRegistered fault is that it is 
> intended to be used for the WS-AT completion protocol, to 
> signal to a registrant that another participant has already 
> claimed the completion participant role.
> 
> While this might argue for moving the fault definition to 
> WS-AT, I don't think that we should remove the fault entirely.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter Furniss [mailto:peter.furniss@choreology.com] 
> Sent: Friday, December 09, 2005 9:54 AM
> To: ws-tx@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [ws-tx] Issue 008 - WS-C: Remove fault 4.6 AlreadyRegistered
> 
> This is hereby declared to be ws-tx Issue 008.
> 
> Please follow-up to this message or ensure the subject line 
> starts Issue 008 - (ignoring Re:, [ws-tx] etc)
> 
> The Related Issues list has been updated to show the issue numbers.
> 
> Issue name -- WS-C: Remove fault 4.6 AlreadyRegistered
>  
> Owner:  Alastair Green [mailto:alastair.green@choreology.com] 
> 
> Target document and draft:
> 
> Protocol:  Coord
> 
> Artifact:  spec / schema
> 
> Draft:
> Coord spec working draft uploaded 2005-12-02
> 
> WS-Coordination schema contributed by input authors, not yet 
> uploaded to Working Drafts folder
>  
> Link to the document referenced:
> 
> http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/15738/WS-Coo
rdination-
> 2005-11-22.pdf
> 
> Section and PDF line number:
> 
> Section 4.6 "Already Registered", ll. 460-468
> 
> 
> Issue type:
> 
> Design
> 
> 
> Related issues:
> 
> Issue 003 - WS-C: Appropriate categories of fault
> Issue 014 - WS-C: EPR equality comparison should not be relied upon
> 
> 
> Issue Description:
> 
> AlreadyRegistered fault is redundant if participant registration is 
> treated as retriable.
> 
> 
> Issue Details:
> 
> [This issue stems from Choreology Contribution issues TX-19 
> and TX-20.]
> 
> The fault AlreadyRegistered is inappropriate for a message-based 
> protocol connecting loosely-coupled and
> potentially administratively-independent execution entities, 
> communicating over unreliable transports.
> 
> The current fault preamble (ll. 461-2) reads:
> 
> "This fault is sent to a participant if the coordinator 
> detects that the
> 
> participant attempted to register for
> the same protocol of the same activity more than once."
> 
> If related issue "WS-AT/WS-C: Make Register/RegisterResponse 
> retriable" 
> is resolved by agreeing to make the Register/RegisterResponse 
> exchange 
> retriable, then this issue should be resolved as proposed below.
> 
> 
> Proposed Resolution:
> 
> Remove ll. 460-468 of the specification.
> Remove l. 99 of the schema document.
> 
>