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

RE: Champions for Draft-status requirements?

From: Sedukhin, Igor <Igor.Sedukhin@ca.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 14:39:25 -0400
Message-ID: <87527035FDD42A428221FA578D4A9A5B454ED6@usilms24.ca.com>
To: "Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)" <RogerCutler@ChevronTexaco.com>, "Hugo Haas" <hugo@w3.org>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>

I don't think reliable messaging falls under AC-0018, which is
management-related.
I agree with Roger that "reliable messaging" is a feature of the
protocol, similar to message integrity, privacy, non-repudiation, etc.

-- Igor Sedukhin .. (igor.sedukhin@ca.com)
-- (631) 342-4325 .. 1 CA Plaza, Islandia, NY 11788


-----Original Message-----
From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) [mailto:RogerCutler@ChevronTexaco.com]

Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 3:13 PM
To: 'Hugo Haas'; www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: RE: Champions for Draft-status requirements?



I would not have thought so, personally -- but perhaps it might.  There
is a phrase about "service level agreements", and I guess this sounds
like it is somewhere in the same ballpark ... But to me "reliable
messaging" has something to do with a messaging protocol more than an
agreement or "managing" web services.  I did try to define "reliable
messaging" in an earlier posting
(http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Aug/0218.html),
since nobody else was responding to the invitation to do so.  

One thing I am sure of, however, is that the phrase "reliable messaging"
does not appear anywhere in the requirements doc other than D-AC017.  If
you look at the early-draft architecture doc you will see that there is
all sorts of stuff popping up about this, and lots of people have
expressed concern about the subject -- so it wouldn't seem to me that
having something in the requirements about it would be very hard to
follow through on.

-----Original Message-----
From: Hugo Haas [mailto:hugo@w3.org] 
Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 3:47 AM
To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: Re: Champions for Draft-status requirements?


* Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) <RogerCutler@ChevronTexaco.com>
[2002-08-22 12:40-0700]
> Basically I'm willing to let it go and it seems to me that the sense
> of the group is moving this way, with the exception that I am REALLY 
> opposed to letting go completely the subject of reliable messaging.  
> If D-AC017 went away there would be no mention of reliable messaging 
> whatever in the requirements, and I think that this would be very 
> inappropriate given the level of interest and priority that is widely 
> put on this subject.  So I am basically proposing getting rid of 
> D-AC017 but adding something specifically about reliable messaging.

Doesn't AC018, with its fairly large umbrella, cover reliable messaging?

Regards,

Hugo

-- 
Hugo Haas - W3C
mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/
Received on Tuesday, 3 September 2002 14:39:38 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:05 GMT