Re: [DS1] Fire-and-forget to single receiver

I guess I have one comment about this and DS2 - in DS5 there is the
specific mention of a transport level ack - so does DS1 and DS2 explicitly
assume there is no ack to the msg at any level. It seems to me that
defining how lower layers on which XP may run behave is not really in
scope and I think we need to be clear that the lack of acknowledgment we
are talking about here is at the XP protocol level

Trying to mandate how lower level protocol stacks behave seems a little
out of scope

Or is this really saying there is no ack at any level  - in which case I
need to understand why

Which leads me to a related question about DS5 - why is it even mentioning
a transport level ack - again this is trying to mandate how lower layers
behave. 

So how is DS5 different that DS1 if we agree that talking about the
behavior of lower layers is not in scope

Or am I not making any sense here?

 
Mark H Needleman
Product Development Specialist - Standards
Data Research Associates, Inc.
1276 North Warson Road
P.O. Box 8495
St Louis, MO 63132-1806
USA

Phone: 800 325-0888 (US/Canada)
       314 432-1100 x318
Fax: 314 993-8927
 
Email: mneedleman@dra.com
 

On Thu, 21 Dec 2000 john_ibbotson@uk.ibm.com wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> DS1  A sender wishes to send an unacknowledged message to a single receiver
> (e.g. send a stock price update every 15 minutes)
> 
> Author: Dick Brooks on behalf of ebXML
> 
> Note: DS1 Originates from splitting the ebXML use case 1.1 into 2 scenarios
>      (DS1 and DS2).
> 
> 
>      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
> 
> 
>

Received on Thursday, 21 December 2000 10:27:17 UTC