RE: FW: Reliable Messaging Summary

Fine with me, but I fear that the nuance is kind of lost on me, so
perhaps I'm not the right one to decide.

-----Original Message-----
From: Duane Nickull [mailto:duane@xmlglobal.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 11:21 AM
To: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: Re: FW: Reliable Messaging Summary



Suggestion (My $0.02 CAD - take it or ignore it ;-)

Reliable Messaging:

1) The ability:

   (a)of a sender of a message to be able to determine whether a given 
   message has been received by its intended receiver and to take 
compensating action in the event a given message has been determined not

to have been received.
[DN] suggest wording reflect event driven methodology and add "within 
set parameters".  Without imposing too tight an implementation 
constraint, it may be nice to at least suggest an event driven model. eg

- change to:
   (a)of a message sender to receive verification that a a given 
message has been received by its intended receiver within the set 
parameters or receive an event-notification that it failed.

   (b)of the intended receiver of the message to be assured that it 
receives and processes a given message once and only once. (c)of both 
sender and receiver of a message to carry out (a) and (b) with a high 
probability of success in the face of inevitable, yet often 
unpredictable, network, system, and software failures. 2) Common Usage: 
An acknowledgement infrastructure between application and transport 
layers intended to improve messaging reliability as described above.


-- 
VP Strategic Relations,
Technologies Evangelist
XML Global Technologies
****************************
ebXML software downloads - http://www.xmlglobal.com/prod/

Received on Wednesday, 5 March 2003 08:23:29 UTC