RE: [ws-rx] Proposal to resolve Issue 006

[Christopher B Ferris <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>]

+1

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

"Marc Goodner" <mgoodner@microsoft.com>
wrote on 10/12/2005 03:06:41 PM:

> +1 that there is no need for this capability.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tom Rutt [mailto:tom@coastin.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2005 2:29 PM
> To: wsrx
> Subject: [ws-rx] Proposal to resolve Issue 006
> 
> Description
> 
>                 Is there a
requirement that the sender can assert that 
> the receiver must
>                 deliver a
particular reliability assurance on a given 
> sequence?
> 
> Discussion          
> 
> It has been agreed that the protocol is the same on any ws -rm Sequence,
> 
> regardless of DA level agreements in place between RMD and Destination
> Application.    There is no need to have a standard protocol
mechanism 
> for the RMS to signal DA requirments on the sequence for the RMD.
> 
> If reliaiblity policy is attached to a destination endpoint at a finer
> level of granularity than endpoint subject level,  an implementaton
> (extension beyond normal conformance) would have to use means outside
> the scope of this standard to convey such requirements (e.g., RMD
could 
> be aware of the wsdl description).
> 
> Proposed resolution to Issue 006:
> 
> close issue with no changes to specfication.
> 
> 
> -- 
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Tom Rutt   email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com
> Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732
774 5133
> 
>