RE: RM and Intermediaries

Ugo, you wrote ...

>>>I got an extensive response from David Burdett at [1], which you might
want to look at...

... thanks for remembering. I do wish that I had more time to devote to this
thread as RM is an area I am interested in. Unfortunately, other demands on
my time prevent me from devoting much attention to the many thoughtful
emails that have been written on this subject.

Best wishes to all and I hope the F2F was a success!

David

-----Original Message-----
From: Ugo Corda [mailto:UCorda@SeeBeyond.com]
Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2003 4:50 PM
To: Ricky Ho; www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: RE: RM and Intermediaries



Last month I raised a similar issue, and I got an extensive response from
David Burdett at [1], which you might want to look at.

Ugo

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Dec/0095.html 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ricky Ho [mailto:riho@cisco.com]
> Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2003 7:50 AM
> To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: RM and Intermediaries
> 
> 
> 
> Lets say S is the sender endpoint, R is the receiver 
> endpoint, and i1, i2 
> are intermediaries that pre-process the message.
> 
> S --> i1 --> i2 --> R
> 
> Do i1 and i2 have to understand RM ? or RM is just an end-to-end 
> handshaking between S and R ?  If so, can S pick a different 
> path in its 
> message resend ?
> 
> Rgds, Ricky
> 
>

Received on Saturday, 25 January 2003 20:55:11 UTC