[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [ws-rx] PR Issue 22: concrete proposal
Comments in line . . . > -----Original Message----- > From: Stefan Batres [mailto:stefanba@microsoft.com] > Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 1:00 PM > To: Gilbert Pilz; ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: RE: [ws-rx] PR Issue 22: concrete proposal > > 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. I think it depends upon why the RMS is terminating. If its part of a normal termination (i.e. the RMS has got acks for all of its messages) I would agree that the RMS might want to retry. If the RMS is "throwing in the towel" (i.e. basically abandoning the sequence because nothing is working) I wouldn't bother. > 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. If I were an RMD, I wouldn't worry about this. If I get a TS for a sequence that I've already terminated, I'll just send back a SequenceTerminated (if I remember I ever had such a sequence) or a UnknownSequence. If I were an RMS and I retried a TS message and got back either of these faults, I don't think I'd be out of line in assuming the first TS got through. In either case, there's not much I can do about it. > 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>> >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]