[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [wsrp-wsia] Issue #92 Maximum size of a handle
I would prefer #3. XML Protocols tend not to limit lengths. Also, if the Producer wants to use Consumer-side state, the spec leaves the Producer no alternative but to use refHandle. This is not true for our "other" two handles, which are registrationHandle and entityHandle, both which have accompanying Consumer-side state fields. Maybe we can resolve this by adding a Consumer-side state to the refHandle field and adopting #2 as a SHOULD. Gil -----Original Message----- From: Rich Thompson [mailto:richt2@us.ibm.com] Sent: Tue, October 15, 2002 19:56 To: wsrp-wsia@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: [wsrp-wsia] Issue #92 Maximum size of a handle We need to reach a decision on this issue. Basically here are the 3 proposals I have heard, their proponents should post pros/cons ASAP. 1) <256 bytes as the Consumer would need to keep these in memory and likely wants to use them as a database key 2) <4K so the memory impact on Consumers is not huge while the Producer usage scenarios are more flexible. 3) unlimited so the Producer can view this as a URI to a resource. I have tried to give an objective and concise statement of these three proposals, sorry if I misrepresented anything. ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC