- From: John Ibbotson <john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2001 08:46:19 +0000
- To: discuss@apps.ietf.org
John Ibbotson
To: "Marshall T. Rose" <mrose+mtr.netnews@dbc.mtview.ca.us>
12/04/2001 cc:
08:42 AM From: John Ibbotson/UK/IBM@IBMGB
Subject: Re: Requirements for reliable message delivery(Document
link: John Ibbotson)
Marshall,
Comments below:
John
XML Technology and Messaging,
IBM UK Ltd, Hursley Park,
Winchester, SO21 2JN
Tel: (work) +44 (0)1962 815188 (home) +44 (0)1722 781271
Fax: +44 (0)1962 816898
Notes Id: John Ibbotson/UK/IBM
email: john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com
"Marshall T. Rose"
<mrose+mtr.netnews@dbc.mtv To: John Ibbotson/UK/IBM@IBMGB
iew.ca.us> cc: "Discuss Apps" <discuss@apps.ietf.org>, "Marshall Rose"
<mrose@dbc.mtview.ca.us>
11/28/2001 05:17 AM Subject: Re: Requirements for reliable message delivery
guys - help me out with something. after reading your I-D, i can't help but
think that you can meet your requirements by:
1. shifting more responsibility (e.g., loss detection) to the endpoints.
<JBI> Absolutely. From a reliability point of view, the responsibility is
not to lose the message at
<JBI> the endponts. In this case, the sending endpoint must have a stored
copy available until it knows
<JBI> unambiguously that the receiving endpoint has successfully stored the
received message persistently.
<JBI> It can then delete its copy. In cases of failure, it can retry and
synchronise with the receiving
<JBI> endpoint.
2. using an application-layer relaying service with deterministic delivery
semantics (e.g., apex with some of the party pack options).
<JBI> I need to read more on APEX before commenting authoritatively on this
:-) But having seen your
<JBI> presentation to the XML Protocol WG in Boston I think APEX could
provide the basis for a reliable
<JBI> protocol. There is still the question as to what is to be done in the
short term and the feedback we get <JBI> from our customers is that HTTP
will be around for a long time and they'd like to make that reliable -
<JBI> warts and all !
what am i missing here?
/mtr
Received on Tuesday, 4 December 2001 10:52:55 UTC