Title: RE: [wsrm] Discussion of Conformance Points for WS-Reliability
Tom:
Drawing the line between one conformance level and the next is always tricky...
Maybe we need more "business" input for this.
E.g.: one could argue that base level should include duplicate elimination,
meaning if a Receiver has to support "exactly once" delivery,
it should not necessarily have to support ordering, as in your "Full" option.
Agree that we may need to split conformance requirements
along the Receiver / Sender line (i.e. a WS may be required to support guaranteed
delivery as a Receiver, but not as a Sender.)
But the RM capability on the sender side should also enter
in the definition of conformance profiles I think.
Jacques
-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Rutt [mailto:]
Sent: Wednesday, January 07, 2004 1:51 PM
To: wsrm
Subject: [wsrm] Discussion of Conformance Points for WS-Reliability
I propose just two levels of conformance for WS-Reliability message
receivers:
Simple: The receiver can handle guaranteed delivery requests
Full: The receiver can handle any WS-Relibility request
A receiving implementation may claim conformance as a Simple receiver,
or as a Full receiver.
A sender would only have to implement the portions of the protocol that
they use, as indicated
by the QOS request parameters they select. Thus we do not need
conformance classes for senders.
What do you think?
--
----------------------------------------------------
Tom Rutt email: ;
Tel: +1 732 801 5744 Fax: +1 732 774 5133
To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of the OASIS TC), go to http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php.
