OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

wsrm message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [wsrm] Issues with RM with WSDL 1.1 R-R operation




Sunil Kunisetty wrote:

>  
>
> Sunil Kunisetty wrote:
>
>>  
>>
>> Jacques Durand wrote:
>>
>>>  
>>>
>>> There was also a 4 pages study we did back in October on the 
>>> implications
>>> of supporting R-R.
>>>
>>  Isn't that document related to Ack on 'Response' scenarios? As far 
>> as I recollect
>>  it is not related to the 'Request' case as we are dealing correctly.
>
>  Oops. I meant 'as we are dealing currently'.
>
>>  
>>
>>>  
>>> I wouldn't rule out RM for the first leg of R-R,
>>> unless we face real issues or that requires more work,
>>
>>  Don't you think the issues (1) & (2) mentioned below are for real?
>>
>>  -Sunil
>>
>>>  
>>> which I am not sure it is the case.
>>> Can we hold on this one? I'd like our developers to look into this
>>> within the next couple of days, as the main issues we seem to have
>>> are on the deployment side within existing WS stacks.
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Sunil Kunisetty [mailto:Sunil.Kunisetty@oracle.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2004 12:38 PM
>>> To: wsrm@lists.oasis-open.org
>>> Subject: [wsrm] Issues with RM with WSDL 1.1 R-R operation
>>>  
>>>
>>>  Just for the heck of it, I wanted to consolidate the problems with 
>>> using RM
>>>  with WSDL 1.1 R-R operation:
>>>
>>>  1) Issues with batching/piggybacking Acks or Faults as mentioned in 
>>> this thread and many other threads:
>>>         http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/wsrm/200402/msg00194.html
>>>

This is not a fundamental problem

>>>  2) Issues with DE in R-R case as Tom mentioned in this mail:
>>>         http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/wsrm/200402/msg00212.html
>>>
A simple fault code solves the probem  This is not a big deal

>>> 3) Message ordering is not that useful and efficient in the R-R case
>>>       as the clients may be blocked for the 'buffered' messages.
>>>
You may want to ensure a credit is applied before the debit.

>>>  4) GD in general is not a big requirement as a Response can be
>>>      construed as an Ack.
>>>
But RM can give duplicate elimination, incases where the sender retries 
on timeout.

This is an important value added by wsrm,  In fact they might only want
duplicate elimination without guaranteed delivery, since the response 
serves as
an ack.

>>>  5) If not for Response pattern, the use of RM fault mechanism to
>>>      report RM errors is a clear winner. The only case SOAP Fault
>>>      mechanism can be used to report RM errors is the Response
>>>      pattern case.
>>>
>>>  So do we really need to support RM features for WSDL 1.1 R-R operation?
>>>
Because there is value in it, and the problems are non existent, given 
an awareness
that the response is not "protected" by the protocol.

>>>  Again, I'm not suggesting to remove it haphazardly, but lets think 
>>> about it
>>>  for one final time before it becomes too late.
>>>
It is there, why tear it out for a few minor points.

Tom Rutt

>>>  -Sunil
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the 
>>> roster of the OASIS TC), go to 
>>> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>>>

-- 
----------------------------------------------------
Tom Rutt		email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@fsw.fujitsu.com
Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133





[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]