W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > December 2002

RE: Next Steps in Reliable Messaging (was RE: Different Levels of Rel iable Messaging)

From: Assaf Arkin <arkin@intalio.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2002 11:06:00 -0800
To: "Cutler, Roger \(RogerCutler\)" <RogerCutler@ChevronTexaco.com>, "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>
Message-ID: <IGEJLEPAJBPHKACOOKHNMEAACPAA.arkin@intalio.com>
MessageRoger,

I acknoweldge a mistake on my part. I was referring to David's Level 0-5 but
not putting that in the proper context.

I believe an optimal architecture for developing high-level ("business")
applications that perform reliable asynchronous messaging requires RMs that
deal with repeated retries, repeated acks, and once-only message delivery.
Such RMs are widely available and deployed today (MOMs), and throughout the
discussion I assumed developers would opt to use such RMs.

From the perspective of XMLP, the "application" is the RM, not the
high-level application that uses the RM. XMLP needs to provide those
capabilities that an RM would require in order to interoperate with any
other RM. The minimal requirement here is to standardize the headers and the
ack message.

So by standardizing on Level 0 at the XMLP level, and selecting to use an RM
that does additional levels, we get reliable messaging for the high-level
application.

arkin

  -----Original Message-----
  From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) [mailto:RogerCutler@ChevronTexaco.com]
  Sent: Sunday, December 15, 2002 9:43 PM
  To: Champion, Mike; Assaf Arkin; www-ws-arch@w3.org
  Subject: RE: Next Steps in Reliable Messaging (was RE: Different Levels of
Rel iable Messaging)


  I believe that this is
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Dec/0083.html, as
referenced in my summary.

  Although I am obviously far less expert than the people having this
technical discussion, perhaps I could comment that it worries me that they,
or someone, is talking about sending level 0 of this stack to XMLP and
defering the higher levels.  This does not seem right to me because level
zero does not seem to include the basics contained in the ebXML RM spec --
which I consider to be somewhat minimal.  Aspects that do not seem to be
contained are repeated tries at delivery by the sender and handling by the
receiver of repeated receptions of the same message.

  -----Original Message-----
  From: Champion, Mike [mailto:Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com]
  Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 8:18 PM
  To: Assaf Arkin; Champion, Mike; www-ws-arch@w3.org
  Subject: RE: Next Steps in Reliable Messaging (was RE: Different Levels of
Rel iable Messaging)



    -----Original Message-----
    From: Assaf Arkin [mailto:arkin@intalio.com]
    Sent: Saturday, December 14, 2002 8:39 PM
    To: Champion, Mike; www-ws-arch@w3.org
    Subject: RE: Next Steps in Reliable Messaging (was RE: Different Levels
of Rel iable Messaging)


    I apologize for any lengthy discussion on my part.

  Not at all!  I'm not trying to stifle the discussion, just make sure that
we touch on the topics that the working group will ultimately have to deal
with to push the idea forward.

  Can someone point us to David's "6 levels" ... recall that not all of us
have read the whole thread.

  Thanks again!
Received on Monday, 16 December 2002 14:06:59 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:11 GMT