NEW ISSUE: tightening-up the state tables

[Jacques Durand <JDurand@us.fujitsu.com>]

Title: Tightening up the state tables

 

Description:

(a)- RMD table: there is no way to transition from " none" to "connecting" state  (event "CreateSequence receive" is missing)

 

(b)- RMD table: In the "event" entries: for events that concern "Faults", (e.g. Unknown Sequence Fault,  Terminated Sequence Fault), and when either RMS or RMD could generate such Faults,  it should be mentioned in table if the event is about receiving or generating such a Fault (assume it is "receive").

 

©- RMS table: mention that either the case of offered sequences is not handled, or add this case.

(d) "connected" state a bit ambiguous a name - too much transport related.

(e) these tables are more about sequences state than RMD/RMS states (as the same RMD/S can find itself in many states w/r to many sequences.

Justification: tables could be misleading to users if incomplete. Some developers might actually use them to implement an automaton that might miss some cases.

Target: core

Proposal:

(a)    add CreateSequence receive even that lead to connecting state.

(b)   Qualify each event as either "(internal)" or "(received)".

(c)   Add a line with event "offered sequence (received)" that transitions directly from none to connected.

(d)    Replace "connected" with "active", and "connecting" with "activating".

(e)   "This appendix specifies the non-normative state transition tables for RM Source and RM Destination." Replace with: "This appendix specifies the non-normative state transition tables for RM Source and RM Destination, relative to the management of a particular sequence."