RE: [wsrm] Rel 33 and Rel 50, follow-up

From
Jacques Durand <>
Date
2003-11-30T06:05:23+00:00
ID
Thread
RE: [wsrm] Rel 33 and Rel 50, follow-up
Title: RE: [wsrm] Rel 33 and Rel 50, follow-up

Tom: inline <JD>

-----Original Message-----

From: Tom Rutt [mailto:]

Sent: Thursday, November 27, 2003 10:46 AM

To: Jacques Durand

Cc: ''

Subject: Re: [wsrm] Rel 33 and Rel 50, follow-up

> *Message Delivery*:

> Action of transfering the responsibility of processing further a message,

> from the RMP and onto the next processor entity. This action marks

> the end of the RMP processing for this message. The time at which this 

> action

> occurs must be clearly indentifiable so that the next message processor

> can always establish in which order two deliveries are made.

> Examples of delivery are: pushing the message in a queue accessible by 

> an application,

> calling back an application component, storing the message in a 

> database where

> it is accessible by the next processor.

>  

> *Acknowledgement*:

> An acknowledgement is a message containing an RM:Response element 

> referring

> to at least one previous message (and containing no RM:Fault element).

> An acknowledgement means that the acknowledged message has been 

> completely and

> successfully delivered (see Message Delivery).

This sounds too strong

Something like the following (with wordsmithing required)

" An ack means that the acknowledged message has satisfied all the 

ws-reliabiliy requirements placed on it for delivery, and the receiving 

user has accepted the responsibility for completion of delivery, using  

the mechanism specified in its contract with the Receiving Reliable 

message processor.."

<JD> Tom: I don't think the statement was too strong, if you read carefully the above

definition of "delivery", which is nothing more than a transfer of *responsibility*

to the next layer or processor - which is in fact aligned with what you propose.

So "delivery" does not mean here the actual transfer of the message to its final

destination/user, in which case I would agree with you. 

However, I take it that my def could be confusing.

How about a more explicit def taking the best of your comments, but restating

the definition of "delivery" above:

        "An acknowledgement means that the acknowledged message has been 

        successfully delivered, meaning simply that it has satisfied all the 

        reliability requirements placed on it for delivery, and that the RMP 

        having made the message available to its next processor, is no longer 

        responsible for processing it further."

Note that we don't need any mention of "users", and even more of "acceptance".

Regards,

Jacques