- From: Burdett, David <david.burdett@commerceone.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Aug 2002 13:48:50 -0700
- To: "'Mark Baker'" <distobj@acm.org>, "Burdett, David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com>
- Cc: "'Christopher B Ferris'" <chrisfer@us.ibm.com>, www-ws-arch@w3.org
Mark, you said ... >>>How can you be sure that a message was received? Because there's always a chance that the response to a message doesn't make it, and leaves the two parties out of synch (i.e. two army problem)<<< Yes, but IF you do receive the response to a message, then you KNOW that the message was received. The uncertainty arises if you do not receive a response to a message as you say. David -----Original Message----- From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org] Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 1:02 PM To: Burdett, David Cc: 'Christopher B Ferris'; www-ws-arch@w3.org Subject: Reliable messaging On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 11:48:41AM -0700, Burdett, David wrote: > I like your definitions, however, they do not address what I think is the > certainty that although you can be sure a message was received, you can > never be absolutely sure that it was not. How can you be sure that a message was received? Because there's always a chance that the response to a message doesn't make it, and leaves the two parties out of synch (i.e. two army problem). MB -- Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred) Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. distobj@acm.org http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.idokorro.com
Received on Thursday, 29 August 2002 16:48:49 UTC