[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [ws-rx] i144 - Editorial (maybe) RMS MessageNumberRolloverbehavior unclear
Comments in line:
From: Doug Davis
No, this fault when generated by the RM Source is not likely a wire level event, but the spec says (June 27 version of WD 15) on line 583 that the “RM Source or Destination MUST generate a MessageNumberRollover fault”. Should that text be changed to reflect your assertion?
No, this is not my interpretation; I am just trying to apply what the spec text says as it relates to the construction of the state tables. To support the behavior as stated in the paragraph cited above, I assumed the need for this event (at either RMD or RMS) required some sort of state change that would permit the retransmission of unacknowledged messages while preventing the acceptance of new messages for transmission. This is the only difference between the connected and the rollover state. If this state is omitted, then the RMS would continue to fire new messages at the RMD. The state is there since this behavior is sort of implied by the last sentence of that paragraph.
That would not be prohibited on a new Sequence; but the old sequence is not useful for the transfer of any new messages. I guess that there is always either expiry or the RMS’s knowledge that all transferred messages have been acknowledged. I added the closure option since the spec says in sec 3.2 that either the RMS or RMD MAY close a sequence before terminating it. Terminating the sequence would be the humane thing to do once all messages have been acked or closure then termination otherwise. I would hate to leave a rolled over sequence languishing and suffering in the RMD.