Issue 2627: Semantics of RoutingPolicy with synch. invokes? (messaging-rtf) Source: (, ) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: Summary: The Messaging spec defines the RoutingPolicy as controlling whether or not requests are sent over a Router. Is this policy only intended for asynchronous method invocations, or is intended to apply to all invocations? If the latter, then how should synchronous invocations be sent over a Router? I"d suggest that this policy applies only to requests sent using polled or callback dispatching. Resolution: RoutingPolicy applies only to requests sent using polled or callback dispatching. Revised Text: In orbrev/01-03-01 in section 22.2.5.3 insert the following sentence as the third sentence of the first paragraph of this section: "This policy does not apply to synchronous invocations." Actions taken: May 4, 1999: received issue October 3, 2001: closed issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== Date: Tue, 04 May 1999 16:07:27 -0400 From: "Matthew A. Mihic" Organization: IONA Technologies, Inc. X-Accept-Language: en To: messaging-rtf@omg.org, issues@omg.org Subject: Semantics of RoutingPolicy with synch. invokes? Refers orbos/98-05-06. The Messaging spec defines the RoutingPolicy as controlling whether or not requests are sent over a Router. Is this policy only intended for asynchronous method invocations, or is intended to apply to all invocations? If the latter, then how should synchronous invocations be sent over a Router? I'd suggest that this policy applies only to requests sent using polled or callback dispatching. Regards, Matt -- Matthew Mihic IONA Technologies, Inc. Phone: +1-617-949-4302 From: Bill Binko To: "'Matthew A. Mihic'" , messaging-rtf@omg.org, issues@omg.org Subject: RE: Semantics of RoutingPolicy with synch. invokes? Date: Tue, 4 May 1999 16:18:33 -0400 > -----Original Message----- > From: Matthew A. Mihic [mailto:mmihic@iona.com] > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 4:07 PM > To: messaging-rtf@omg.org; issues@omg.org > Subject: Semantics of RoutingPolicy with synch. invokes? > > > Refers orbos/98-05-06. > > The Messaging spec defines the RoutingPolicy as controlling > whether or not > requests are sent over a Router. Is this policy only > intended for asynchronous > method invocations, or is intended to apply to all > invocations? If the latter, > then how should synchronous invocations be sent over a Router? > > I'd suggest that this policy applies only to requests sent > using polled or > callback dispatching. We would add oneway calls to this list if the policies are set correctly. Binko Charles "Bill" Binko Technical Resource Connection cwbinko@trcinc.com cwb@mindspring.com (home) (800)872-2992 x4379 Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2001 18:30:38 -0400 From: Jishnu Mukerji Organization: Hewlett-Packard EIAL, Florham Park NJ USA X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.73 [en] (WinNT; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: orb_revision@omg.org Subject: Issue 2627 roposed resolution Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-UIDL: $$(!!0,J!!ZkB!!TO\!! Status: RO Issue 2627: Semantics of RoutingPolicy with synch. invokes? (messaging-rtf) Click here for this issue's archive. Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: The Messaging spec defines the RoutingPolicy as controlling whether or not requests are sent over a Router. Is this policy only intended for asynchronous method invocations, or is intended to apply to all invocations? If the latter, then how should synchronous invocations be sent over a Router? I"d suggest that this policy applies only to requests sent using polled or callback dispatching. Resolution: RoutingPolicy applies only to requests sent using polled or callback dispatching. Revised Text: In orbrev/01-03-01 in section 22.2.5.3 insert the following sentence as the third sentence of the first paragraph of this section: "This policy does not apply to synchronous invocations." Actions taken: Incorporate changes and close issue ___________________________________________________________ This proposed resolution will appear in the next vote unless someone feels this needs further discussion. The proposal is based on a determination that was arrived at in a face to face meeting long time ago, as reported by Bill Binko. Thanks, Jishnu.