RE: T2 SyncReply and ReliableMessagingMethod in QualityOfServiceInfo

[David Fischer <david@drummondgroup.com>]

Do you mean another Delivery Channel in the CPA?  I can live with that.

David Fischer
Drummond Group.

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris.Ferris@Sun.COM [mailto:Chris.Ferris@Sun.COM]On Behalf Of
christopher ferris
Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 8:47 AM
To: David Fischer
Cc: ebXML Msg
Subject: Re: T2 SyncReply and ReliableMessagingMethod in
QualityOfServiceInfo


David,

The "flexibility" to which you refer is not the intended
puspose of SyncReply.

The puspose that you see for this should in fact be a separate
transport binding IMO (even if it is still HTTP).

Cheers,

Chris


David Fischer wrote:
>
> How do you set SyncReply on a message-by-message basis?  If I understand you
> correctly, syncReply MUST apply to ALL transfers between two parties or to
> None -- must always be the same.  I think we may want a little more
flexibility.
> We allow this flexibility in multi-hop, why not in single-hop?
>
> In EDIINT, syncReply was always default to True and we occasionally would
change
> to False for very large files -- allowing the connection to close rather than
> wait (potentially hours) for a very large file to be decrypted or the MIC to
be
> generated for a NRR.  (Instead of syncReply, EDIINT calls this parameter
> Receipt-Delivery-Option).  IMO, we need to allow for the unforeseen.
>
> In the case of ReliableMessagingMethod, I'm not even sure what this does or
why
> we need it at all.  What does a value of "Transport" mean -- the spec doesn't
> say?  I assume it means just send the message and don't worry about RM since
> this hop can't handle it?  I think this will never be used but David seemed to
> think it was needed and I don't have any heartburn with that.  Since I this
sits
> right next to SyncReply in the Ack, I included it in parameters which need to
be
> allowed without an Ack.  Either way is fine with me.
>
> David.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: christopher ferris [mailto:chris.ferris@east.sun.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2001 5:58 AM
> To: David Fischer
> Cc: ebXML Msg
> Subject: Re: T2 SyncReply and ReliableMessagingMethod in
> QualityOfServiceInfo
>
> David,
>
> Where does this requirement come from? In the case of
> syncReply, the CPA is what determines this. In the absence
> of a CPA, then a virtual CPA applies.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Chris
>
> David Fischer wrote:
> >
> > There should be nothing in the Via which is not also in other headers.  Via
> > should only be used for multi-hop intermediaries.  In the case of SyncReply,
> > there is no single-hop way of requesting SyncReply=true.
> >
> > Attributes SyncReply and ReliableMessagingMethod should also be in
> > QualityOfServiceInfo.  They should retain their current defaults.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > David Fischer
> > Drummond Group.
> >
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
> > "unsubscribe" in the body to: ebxml-msg-request@lists.oasis-open.org