[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: semantics of "at most once" delivery assur ance
No. You can't make that assumption. Cheers, Christopher Ferris STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com blog: http://webpages.charter.net/chrisfer/blog.html phone: +1 508 377 9295 Dan Leshchiner <dleshc@tibco.com> wrote on 07/28/2005 02:55:47 PM: > if AS makes RMS aware that AtMostOnce is used by AD/RMD, then RMS can assume that no > retransmissions will be necessary and, consequently, does not need to take up its resources to > make retransmissions available, right? > > Christopher B Ferris wrote: > I think you meant AtMostOnce mode. I suppose you could do that, but from > the > perspective of the RMS, it is still retransmitting until it receives an > ack. > > Cheers, > > Christopher Ferris > STSM, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture > email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com > blog: http://webpages.charter.net/chrisfer/blog.html > phone: +1 508 377 9295 > > Dan Leshchiner <dleshc@tibco.com> wrote on 07/27/2005 06:36:24 PM: > > > Christopher B Ferris wrote: > > > However, the protocol as specified would never be able to complete a > sequence > if there are lost messages from the RMD perspective and the RMS is not > retransmitting them. > > > > why so? as RMD, if i see a gap or AckRequested for a sequence number i > have not received and i am operating in "at least once" mode with my AD, > > > > why cant i just send an Ack? if i did so, wouldn't that enable us to > complete the sequence? > > thanks, > dan > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]