[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] More on i113
Durand, Jacques R. wrote: > Mmmh… I have been using the latest source provided to me by Matt > Lovett I believe. > the latest state tables, to my knowledge, are in http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/email/archives/200604/msg00011.html Tom Rutt > Looking quickly at WD12 pdf, the tables are pretty much the same as > what I started from – actually even more undetermined (still many “?”) > > So the changes I proposed (in red in the RTF) depart indeed enough > from the source tables to make it hard to identify the original ;-) > > Jacques > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* Marc Goodner [mailto:mgoodner@microsoft.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 02, 2006 5:14 PM > *To:* Durand, Jacques R.; Matthew Lovett > *Cc:* ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org > *Subject:* RE: [ws-rx] More on i113 > > Actually, I’m looking at this now and it looks like it is using an old > version of the state table. I can’t line this up against what is in > WD12 at all. > > Marc Goodner > > Technical Diplomat > > Microsoft Corporation > > Tel: (425) 703-1903 > > Blog: http://spaces.msn.com/mrgoodner/ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* Marc Goodner [mailto:mgoodner@microsoft.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, May 02, 2006 3:30 PM > *To:* Durand, Jacques R.; Matthew Lovett > *Cc:* ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org > *Subject:* RE: [ws-rx] More on i113 > > Jacques, > > Is this document the proposed updates you note below? > > View Document Details: > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/document.php?document_id=17864 > > Download Document: > > http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ws-rx/download.php/17864/state-tables-JD-3-diffs.rtf > > Marc Goodner > > Technical Diplomat > > Microsoft Corporation > > Tel: (425) 703-1903 > > Blog: http://spaces.msn.com/mrgoodner/ > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* Durand, Jacques R. [mailto:JDurand@us.fujitsu.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, April 26, 2006 1:02 PM > *To:* Matthew Lovett > *Cc:* ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org > *Subject:* RE: [ws-rx] More on i113 > > Matt: > > Most proposed updates (except some in my #2) still apply to your > latest tables – will propose a sample of updated tables. > > Also propose the following: > > - to not " Fault a Fault", e.g. if RMS receives a Message Rollover > Fault for an unknown sequence, > > it will not complain back with "Unknown Sequence Fault". > > - When sequence expires: propose it closes rather than terminates: one > must still be able to query > > it to get a final Ack. > > Thanks, > > Jacques > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > *From:* Matthew Lovett [mailto:MLOVETT@uk.ibm.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, April 26, 2006 2:20 AM > *To:* Durand, Jacques R. > *Cc:* ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org > *Subject:* Re: [ws-rx] More on i113 > > > Hi Jacques, > > Which version of the tables are you working from? Issue i096 was > recently accepted by the TC, and includes an updated PDF for the > tables. Unfortunately this issue hasn't been folded into the current > working draft.... so you should probably describe your changes > relative to i096 for now. My note to the TC that contained the > proposal for i096 contains both a PDF and the original open office > doc, so it should be quite easy to produce an annotated doc from there. > > http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ws-rx/200604/msg00011.html > > Thanks > > Matt > > > "Durand, Jacques R." <JDurand@us.fujitsu.com> wrote on 26/04/2006 > 04:15:10: > >> While working on a more detailed proposal for 113, it appears to me >> that these tables need a bit more work than I thought. >> >> (Again I see these tables as more than just accessory: they are >> necessary to nail down corner cases, and are ultimate ref material >> for developers.) >> >> In addition to items currently in 113, I propose the following – >> depending on reactions on the mailing list, I would update 113 > appropriately: >> >> 1- As mentioned before, for each one of the tables, events that may >> occur fall in two categories: >> >> (a) those generated by the RM component (e.g. RMD generates and >> sends a Fault) and under full control of the RM component, >> (b) those “received” from outside , e.g. RMS gets a Fault message. >> >> for (a) events, it is OK to use “N/A” for the non-relevant states >> (the RM component has control over generating these events), but we >> cannot just use “N/A” for (b) events, that the RM component must be >> prepared to handle in whatever state it is in, even if such events >> occur when they shouldn’t. We need to tell what is the effect of >> receiving (b) events in every state (even if most of the times, sate >> remains the same). Can’t just brush it off with N/A… >> >> 2- There are still several TBD values in these tables – some of them >> are in particular related to the case where, say the RMS, gets a >> fault like “Seq Closed Fault” or “Seq Terminated Fault”, while RMS >> has not even closed or terminated the Seq (mostly, a decision from >> RMD). I assume an RMS should update to “closed” when getting a Seq >> Closed Fault, even if it has never sent CloseSequence (like it does >> for termination). This has to appear in the table. >> Another case of questionable transition, is the “Elapse Expires >> duration” event. Should close IMO instead of terminate, as RMS may >> want to be able to query a final Ack. >> >> 3- there are events ( lines) in these tables that actually do not >> cause any state transition. E.g. in RMS table: “new message”, >> “retransmit of unack message” , “SeqAck (non final)”, “Nack”. But it >> seems we are interested in reporting what should the RMS behavior be >> for these in each current state. I’d suggest to do this outside >> these state transition tables, e.g. in another table where we >> consider specific events that do not cause any transition, - but >> need to tell what should the RMS (RMD) behavior be depending on the >> state it is in -, (kind of “decision table”). >> >> Jacques >> >> > -- ---------------------------------------------------- Tom Rutt email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@us.fujitsu.com Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]