AS need for ordered delivery?

["Marc Goodner" <mgoodner@microsoft.com>]

I'm retitling the thread because this issue and AI are closed.

Why would an AS need to send messages in order if the AD didn't require
it? If the AD does need ordering it would request it of the RMD and the
AS/RMS shouldn't need to care about the DA in effect as it has been
taken care of at the destination.


-----Original Message-----
From: Gilbert Pilz [mailto:Gilbert.Pilz@bea.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 25, 2005 8:58 PM
To: Duane Nickull; 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

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
>