RE: [ws-rx] PR Issue 22: concrete proposal

[Stefan Batres <stefanba@microsoft.com>]

Gil,

This seems sane too me. I do have an issue that is not directly related to PR0022 but seems somewhat related to how we address it. With the spec as-is and with your proposed changes we don't have a quick resource reclamation mechanism like we did in the submitted spec. For example:

I am an RMS.
I send one of these TS with LM.
Should I retry if I don't get a response? Probably yes.

You are an RMD.
You get my TS with LM.
You send a TSR.
Since the TSR might get lost, and because I might retry the TS, you should be ready to respond to my TS retry.
How long do you remember the sequence in case I retry?
In the submitted spec, if you got the TS you could immediately forget about the sequence and never respond again. This worked because we put the LM in a Sequence header.

Thanks

--Stefan


-----Original Message-----
From: Gilbert Pilz [mailto:gpilz@bea.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 12:49 PM
To: ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [ws-rx] PR Issue 22: concrete proposal

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>>