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: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 17:51:45 -0400
Never mind - I didn't realize I needed
to click on the insert point instead of just hover over it.
-Doug
Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS
04/04/2006 05:47 PM
|
To
| "Bob Freund-Hitachi"
<bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>
|
cc
| "[WS-RX]" <ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
Subject
| Re: [ws-rx] Issue 106 Alternative
Proposal - Rough idea - resend with attachment |
|
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]