Re: [wsrm] Singleton group with SequenceNumber?

[Tom Rutt <tom@coastin.com>]

Tony Graham wrote:

>>From off-list mail:
>
>Sunil Kunisetty <sunil.kunisetty@oracle.com> wrote at Fri, 20 Feb 2004 17:49:54 -0800:
>  
>
>>Tony Graham wrote:
>>    
>>
>...
>  
>
>>>What about the singleton case that also has a sequence number?
>>>      
>>>
>> In our colloquial references, a singleton is a message without SeqNum.
>> If it has a SeqNum, then it is considered has a Group. A group of
>> 1 is still valid.... In such case, the following example will apply
>>    
>>
>
>If you mean considering a Group with only one message (that uses
>SequenceNum) as a Group for the purposes of reporting an
>Acknowledgment or Fault for that Group, then I see what you mean.
>
>However, Section 2.3 says, beginning at line 512, that a singleton
>group can be a message with a SequenceNumber:
>
>   (1) In case there is only one message in the group (singleton): the
>       group ID, which is a globally unique group identifier, may be
>       used alone as Message Identifier. No sequence number is
>       required, although allowed.
>
>I asked on Monday [1] what a singleton group with a sequence number
>would look like. (Well, I really just said that the spec should provide
>an example.)
>
>A group of 1 is not valid since the 'status' attribute can't indicate
>both the start and end of a group, and the 'status' value has to be
>'Start' for the first message in a group (line 989):
>
>   The sender node MUST send a very first message, to guarantee the
>   message order, with "Start" for this attribute.
>
>...
>  
>
>> Currently there is no way to distinguish a Group with only one message
>> (that uses SequenceNum)  as a Singleton unless Request Header is
>> also changed to reflect something similar.
>>    
>>
>
>Then Section 2.3 should be changed or the 'status' attribute should
>allow a 'Single' value (or similar).  At this point I think that it
>would be simpler to change Section 2.3.
>
I agree it would be easier to have a singleton group never use the 
sequence no in its request.

If this was the case, how would your proposed schema for the 
messageReplies look like?


Tom Rutt

>
>Regards,
>
>
>Tony Graham
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Web Products, Technologies and Standards           Phone: +353 1 8199708
>Sun Microsystems                                              x(70)19708
>East Point Business Park, Dublin 3, Ireland
>
>
>[1] http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/wsrm/200402/msg00127.html
>
>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php.
>
>  
>


-- 
----------------------------------------------------
Tom Rutt		email: tom@coastin.com; trutt@fsw.fujitsu.com
Tel: +1 732 801 5744          Fax: +1 732 774 5133