[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] PR Issue 22: concrete proposal
Chris I like your suggestions. Can I propose s/highest message number/highest assigned message number/ Since we clearly talk about assigning message numbers I believe this is a clear concept. Paul Christopher B Ferris wrote: > > Gil, > > The proposed text starting on line 564 makes the false assumption that > messages are transmitted in MessageNumber order. > I don't think that this is necessarily a safe assumption. I think that > it could also be misinterpreted to mean the > last transmitted Sequence Traffic Message as opposed to the one with > the highest MessageNumber (note that > a retransmission, even in the case where the messages are initially > transmitted in order, could be the last one > transmitted). Finally, the text you had proposed is not explicit as to > WHICH Sequence this all applies... Clearly, you > meant to indicate that this applies to the Sequence being terminated. > > I would propose that that text starting on line 564 be modified as > follows: > > In order to allow the RM Destination to determine if it has received > all of the > messages in a Sequence, the RM Source includes a LastMsgNumber element > in the > TerminateSequence message. The LastMsgNumber element specifies the > highest message > number of all Sequence Traffic Messages for the particular Sequence > being terminated. The RM Destination can use this information, for > example, to implement the > behavior indicated by > /wsrm:CreateSequenceResponse/wsrm:IncompleteSequenceBehavior. > > Also, starting on line 588, the same issue applies. Suggest replacing > with the following text: > > The RM Source MUST include this element in any TerminateSequence > messages it sends. The RM > Source MUST set the value of this element to the highest MessageNumber > of any Sequence Traffic Message > for the Sequence identified in this TerminateSequence message. > > Cheers, > > Christopher Ferris > STSM, Software Group Standards Strategy > email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com > blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/chrisferris > phone: +1 508 377 9295 > > "Gilbert Pilz" <gpilz@bea.com> wrote on 10/26/2006 03:48:57 PM: > > > Attached is a proposal for PR i022 in the form of a diff against CD-04. > > The main points are: > > > > 1.) wsrm:TerminateSequence has been expanded to include a mandatory > > LastMsgNumber element the value of which is, surprisingly enough, the > > number of the last message in the Sequence. > > > > 2.) Sending wsrm:TerminateSequence is now mandatory; basically the whole > > thing won't hold together unless the RMS is required to send a > > wsrm:TerminateSequence. > > > > <<wsrm-1.1-spec-pr-i022.pdf>> > > [attachment "wsrm-1.1-spec-pr-i022.pdf" deleted by Christopher B > > Ferris/Waltham/IBM] -- Paul Fremantle VP/Technology and Partnerships, WSO2 OASIS WS-RX TC Co-chair http://bloglines.com/blog/paulfremantle paul@wso2.com (646) 290 8050 "Oxygenating the Web Service Platform", www.wso2.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]