Ok,
I guess that ack req is optional too given
the MAY in the spec.
On the point of InvalidAck[msg] that is
intended to mean an acknowledgment that is invalid, not a fault message
When the invalid acknowledgement range occurs
, it causes the generation of an Invalid Acknowledgement Fault see sec 4.4
Thanks
-bob
From: Doug Davis
[mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 4:26
PM
To: Bob Freund-Hitachi
Cc: Bob Freund-Hitachi; [WS-RX]
Subject: RE: [ws-rx] State tables,
July 5 version and diffs from June 29 version
Ah, sorry I missed the <> in the legend. Shouldn't
AckReq be in <> then ?
re:InvalidAck
[msg] - but isn't this an incoming msg? When an InvalidAck msg comes in
you think it should generate an InvalidAck msg?
-Doug
|
"Bob Freund-Hitachi"
<bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>
07/06/2006 04:11 PM
|
|
To
|
Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM@IBMUS, "Bob
Freund-Hitachi" <bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>
|
|
cc
|
"[WS-RX]"
<ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
|
Subject
|
RE: [ws-rx] State tables, July 5 version and
diffs from June 29 version
|
|
Comments in-line:
From: Doug Davis
[mailto:dug@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2006 3:57 PM
To: Bob Freund-Hitachi
Cc: [WS-RX]
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] State tables, July 5 version and diffs from
June 29 version
More comments on the state tables:
RMS Table:
Why does "<CloseSequence>" have the <>'s?
Because it is optional per Section 3.2
In the SeqAck(final) [msg] row, I think you just can just "Process
Ack" not "Process Ack/Nack" since a final Ack can't contain a
Nack.
You are correct as much as it irks me.
InvalidAck [msg] row, I'm not sure they would generate an InvalidAckFault since
that seems to imply they may be sent in response to this msg, I think an
'No action' is more consistent with you other cells.
No, Spec says the fault happens (see Sec 4.4)
Event occurs upon the receipt of the RMS of an invalid
acknowledgement range
RMD Table:
CloseSequence autonomously and SeqAck autonomously have <>'s
They are both optional.
Still don't get the differ between N/A and blank. :-)
Blank means we don’t say anything about the combo. N/A
says we would be daft if we tried
thanks,
-Doug
|
"Bob Freund-Hitachi"
<bob.freund@hitachisoftware.com>
07/05/2006 06:02 PM
|
|
To
|
"[WS-RX]"
<ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
|
cc
|
|
|
Subject
|
[ws-rx] State tables, July 5 version and
diffs from June 29 version
|
|
Changes state names from connecting/connected to creating/created
Changes xmit faults to generate failts
Other minor references[attachment
"wsrm-1.1-spec-wd-15-ith-ST-Edits2006-07-05.doc" deleted by Doug
Davis/Raleigh/IBM] [attachment "wsrm-1.1-spec-wd-15-ith-ST-Edits2006-07-05-diffs.doc"
deleted by Doug Davis/Raleigh/IBM]