Re: [wsrm] [REL-XX]Proposal for POLL RM-Reply Pattern

[Patrick Yee <kcyee@cecid.hku.hk>]

> At the Redwood City meeting last May we came to general agreement that 
> the protocol
> requires persistence to work (e.g, persistence of ids for duplicate 
> elimintation, persistence of
> message contents for ordered delivery).  However, some users might we 
> willing to accept
> protocol failure under specific circumstances which are agreed witht 
> the system supplier (e.g, if the battery is not kept charged on a cell 
> phone, it might loose its "persistence" capability).
>
> Thus this preagreed limit for persistence time is subject to user 
> contract, since it involves an
> argreement as to what conditions are acceptable for tolerating 
> protocol failure.
>
> I hope this helps.


I see. That's fine for tolerating protocol failure. Now, the persistence 
is not only for the purpose of reliable protocol only, but also for the 
purpose of status query. If I said I support status query, it will be 
unreasonable for me to delete the persistence, since the spec doesn't 
indicate a deadline which I can delete the persistence after that..

Am I on the right track?

Regards, -Patrick