Issue 2743: Semantics of Timeout Value (notif_service-rtf)
Source:  (, )
Nature: 
Severity: 
Summary: The issue author claims that the spec does not explicitly state 

          when the service starts the "clock" with respect to an event's

          Timeout value. One possibility would be to start the clock as soon

          as the event enters the channel (i.e, at the receiving 

          ProxyConsumer). Another would be to start the clock when the event

          is queued for delivery at the ProxySupplier.
Resolution: fixed, see below
Revised Text: Sentence added to description of Timeout property in Expiry Time section

     of section 2.5.5
Actions taken:
June 16, 1999: received issue
November 16, 1999: closed issue
Discussion: 
Disposition: The issue author did not state which of the above two possible

             semantics they prefer. Personally, I think the semantic that the

             clock starts ticking as soon as the event is received by the

             ProxyConsumer is the only one that makes sense, so I'll propose

             the voting that way. In reality, though, this is another issue

             in which I feel common sense overrides the need for explicit

             statement.



VOTE: YES means add text stating that the clock starts ticking when the event

      is received by the ProxyConsumer.      

      NO means to do nothing.


End of Annotations:=====