+1 too
Globally unique is implicit since there is
no known technology to expand uniqueness beyond registries on this planet.
-bob
From: Marc Goodner
[mailto:mgoodner@microsoft.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 14, 2006
8:33 PM
To: Doug Davis;
ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [ws-rx] [NEW ISSUE]
RM SeqID Globally Unique
+1
I hope we can adopt
this on tomorrow’s call.
From: Doug
Davis [mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Thursday, June 08, 2006 8:27
PM
To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [ws-rx] [NEW ISSUE] RM
SeqID Globally Unique
Title: RM SeqID
Globally Unique
Justification:
in WD13.pdf, line 142 the spec
says:
The RM
Destination creates a new Sequence and returns its globally unique identifier.
That's the only spot we talk
about the seqID being globally unique.
We do say that the Offered
SeqID needs to be "unique" and we say that Sequence headers (acks...)
MUST use unique seqID's but we never actually say that the seqID returned by
the CS needs to be unique. To be explicit we should say that.
Proposal:
In WD13.pdf, line 286 says:
The RM
Destination MUST set the value of this element to the absolute URI (conformant
with RFC3986
[URI]) of
the Sequence that has been created by the RM Destination.
I proposal we change it to:
The RM
Destination MUST set the value of this element to the absolute URI (conformant
with RFC3986
[URI]) that uniquely identifies of the
Sequence that has been created by the RM Destination.
And remove the word
"globally" from line 142 (the sample flow text). We should
either not use the word 'globally' at all or use it for all instances of
'unique' - [flip coin]: I propose we remove it.
-Doug