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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ws-rx message

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


Subject: Re: [ws-rx] NEW ISSUE: InOrder delivery assurance spanning multiplesequences


Duane Nickull wrote:
> My $0.02 on this.
> 
> The WS-RX specification has a mechanism to ensure InOrder delivery for 
> each sequence.  Each sequence is identified by a unique identifier.  The 
> UID combined with the sequence number are infallible.
> 
> A "Sequence" is a transport level view on a series of messages.  The 
> transport components are tasked with assuring the sequences are 
> transmitted and received as per the tokens declared within the headers.  
> The presumption here is that the messaging layer probably does not 
> "set()" the sequence numbers - that is done by a higher level 
> application that provides the messaging layer with the content and 
> variables to build into a message.
> 
> If there are two sequences to be reconciled later because they relate, I 
> would assert that this logic belongs in a higher-than-messaging level 
> application.  The messaging layer and the WS-RX specification should 
> probably not attempt to define the mechanism or logic.  In short, I 
> believe it should be a slave to its master(s).
> 
> Anyone else?
> 

+1 to -- this logic belongs to a higher-level application.

> Duane
> 
> Andreas Bjärlestam (HF/EAB) wrote:
> 
>> Title: InOrder delivery assurance spanning multiple sequences
>>
>> Description: The InOrder delivery assurance can only be enforced for 
>> messages within one sequence. If a new sequence has to be created, for 
>> example due to a MessageNumber rollover, the ordering of the messages 
>> can not be enforced unless there is a way to link the sequences together.
>> If this is the intention it should be clarified in the spec.
>>
>> Justification: InOrder is one of the supported delivery assurances. 
>> The scope of the ordering should be clear.
>>
>> Target: core
>>
>> Type: design
>>
>> Proposal:
>> Related issues: none
>>
>>
>> If the TC accepts this as an issue, I am willing to take ownership of it.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Andreas Bjärlestam
>>
>>  
>>


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