[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ws-rx] Issue i013 - proposed text changes
Doug: Thanks for the clarification. I wasn't sure what the scope was on i013. Sounds good! Have a good weekend. Duane Doug Davis wrote: > > Duane, > I believe that Jacques is planning on opening a new issue to address > a more dynamic > solution. Issue i013 is just focusing on the cases where the > Destination wants to advertise > a max # less than the max unsigned long as a general max for all > sequences. If on a sequence > by sequence basis it needs to be lower then I think some other > solution (like what Jacques might > propose or your suggestion) will be used. While these are a bit > related because they deal with max message #, > on the last conf call we decided to split out the dynamic solution > into a different issue. > thanks > -Doug > > > > *Duane Nickull <dnickull@adobe.com>* > > 08/05/2005 08:07 PM > > > To > > cc > ws-rx@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject > Re: [ws-rx] Issue i013 - proposed text changes > > > > > > > > > > Doug: > > While I like what you are attempting to resolve, however I still see > potential problems with the methodology suggested below. In addition to > the MaxMessageNumber declaration, there may need to be another mechanism > to ensure a more dynamic and accurate contract for establishing > MaxMessageNumber. > > Assumptions: I am assuming that by attempting to cap the > MaxMessageNumber you are addressing the issue of resources, not simply > just the value of the sequence token. If this is errant, we may need to > discuss this under a different thread. > > Problems: If a RMD makes a static declaration that it supports 'n' as a > static MaxMessageNumber, it has no idea that it can support that at any > specific future time. A source could parse this information and assume > that it is ready to receive a new sequence of up to [some arbitrary > number] of messages, but if a delay occurs in sending the next message, > the RMD may start too many other sequences and not have the resources > ready to process the messages up to the max number. This may invalidate > the MaxMessageNumber capability declaration if there are not enough > resources to process all the messages. > > Addendum to suggestion: In addition to what you proposed, I would > suggest a pattern to have the RM Source request the RMD allocate > resources for a potential maxNumber of messages when sending the first > message of the sequence. No reply or a negative reply would mean it was > not accepted, a positive reply would mean that the RMD has dynamically > allocated resources and the source can now proceed with the sequence. > > Not sure of the exact syntax but something like this could be the first > message in the sequence: > > <wsrm:Sequence ...> > <wsrm:Identifier ...> xs:anyURI </wsrm:Identifier> > <!--added "@maxPossible" --> > <wsrm:MessageNumber maxPossible="55"> xs:unsignedLong > </wsrm:MessageNumber> > <wsrm:LastMessage/>? > ... > </wsrm:Sequence> > > The real issue is not the actual sequence number itself IMO, it is the > resource requirements resulting from high numbers of messages. If a RMD > is accepting RM sequences from multiple sources, it may be > architecturally more elegant to have each one request resources be > allocated rather than a static declaration, which would still be subject > to verification. > > Thoughts? > > Duane > > > > Doug Davis wrote: > > > > > Per my AI on the last conference call here are the list of changes I > > propose for the resolution of issue i013: > > > > In the WS-RM Policy doc: > > > > After line 173, add to the normative outline: > > <wsrm:MaxMessageNumber Number="xs:unsignedLong" ... /> ? > > > > After line 202, add to the more verbose section of the normative > outline: > > /wsrm:RMAssertion/wsrm:MaxMessageNumber > > A parameter that specifies the maximum message number that the > > RM Destination will accept. If omitted, the default value of the > > maximum unsigned long will be assumed. > > > > /wsrm:RMAssertion/wsrm:AcknowledgementInterval/@Number > > The maximum message number. > > > > After line 434, add to the schema: > > <xs:element name="MaxMessageNumber" minOccurs="0" > > > <xs:complexType> > > <xs:attribute name="Number" > > type="xs:unsignedLong" use="required" /> > > <xs:anyAttribute namespace="##any" processContents="lax" /> > > </xs:complexType> > > </xs:element> > > > > thanks > > -Doug > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]