ws-rx message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] Issue 106 Alternative Proposal - Rough idea - resend withattachment
- From: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
- To: "Bob Freund-Hitachi" <bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 17:47:58 -0400
Bob - dunno if its my version of Adobe
but I can't read your inserted text at line 602 - the box that shows up
chops it. Could you paste the updated sections directly to the mailing
list at plan text instead of as a pdf?
thanks
-Doug
"Bob Freund-Hitachi"
<bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>
04/04/2006 05:31 PM
|
To
| "[WS-RX]" <ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
| [ws-rx] Issue 106 Alternative
Proposal - Rough idea - resend with attachment |
|
As an alternative to the proposal I made
in http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-rx/200603/msg00185.html
the following will also satisfy my concerns:
Since implementations may have various methods
of delivering messages to the application and may or may not include some
sort of persistence, it may be instructive to annotate the ack sequence
with information indicating which messages were actually delivered or otherwise
safely transferred to the RMD.
Sequence acknowledgements indicate simply
that the RMD layer has received the message, and provides no information
concerning their subsequent processing or delivery. SequenceAcknowlwdgement/Final
received upon sequence closure may therefore provide ambiguous information
to the RMS concerning the potential deliverability or delivery status of
received messages based in part on message ordering contracts that may
exist between the RMD and the application which are invisible to the RMS.
What is proposed is the inclusion of two
additional attributes to the SequenceAcknowledgement/AcknowledgementRange
element that would define message upper and lower bound ranges that have
been delivered by the RMD to the application
A partial proposal is contained in the attached
pdf based on CD03.
Please see the insertions in lines 560 and
603.
If this proposal is accepted, then the exemplar
in lines 570-580 would need to be expanded as well as schema.[attachment
"wsrm-1.1-spec-cd-03.pdf" deleted by Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM]
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]