[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [ws-rx] Proposal for AI 40 and i024
I'm not sure if asking an RMD what DA it purports to provide is necessarily asking to "see beyond it". If I have an application that relies upon ordered delivery to function correctly and I deploy that service onto an infrastructure with an RMD implementation that can't/won't provide ordered delivery clearly I have made a mistake. The question is do I want that mistake to surface as a exception the first time a client tries to invoke the service (hey dude! this thing can't do ordered delivery!), or would I like the mistake to surface in all sorts of bizarre behaviour by the application? - g > -----Original Message----- > From: Duane Nickull [mailto:dnickull@adobe.com] > Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2005 5:37 PM > To: Anish Karmarkar; Marc Goodner > Cc: ashok.malhotra@oracle.com; ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: RE: [ws-rx] Proposal for AI 40 and i024 > > > My sense of the F2F resolution was that the TC wanted to > capture the fact that DAs, timeouts etc were "observed" > > Anish: > > I do not think they really are unless the RMS can see past > the service. > This is bad architecture IMO. Talk to the interface but > don't try to see beyond it. > > D >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]