Issue 3218: Wrong policy names (messaging-rtf) Source: Perot Systems (Mr. Charles W. Binko, nobody) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: In the following section, three policy names are used: RelativeRoundtripTimeoutPolicy, RelativeTimeoutPolicy, and RelativeReplyTimeoutPolicy. I believe they all refer to the interface we are defining in this paragraph--RelativeRoundtripTimeoutPolicy. If not, we have Policies that are not defined and a big big problem :) Can we please clean this up by and editorial revision? 5.3.4.6 interface RelativeRoundtripTimeoutPolicy This interface is a local object derived from CORBA::Policy. It is used to indicate the relative amount of time for which a Request or its corresponding Reply may be delivered. After this amount of time the Request is cancelled (if a response has not yet been received from the target) or the Reply is discarded (if the Request had already been delivered and a Reply returned from the target). This policy is applied to both synchronous and asynchronous invocations. When instances of RelativeTimeoutPolicy are created, a value of type TimeBase::TimeT is passed to CORBA::ORB::create_policy. This policy is only applicable as a client-side override. When an instance of RelativeReplyTimeoutPolicy is propagated within a PolicyValue in an INVOCATION_POLICIES Service Context, the ptype has value REPLY_END_TIME_POLICY_TYPE and the pvalue is a CDR encapsulation containing the relative_expiry converted into a TimeBase::UtcT end time (as in the case of ReplyEndTimePolicy). Resolution: Incorporate changes and close issue. Revised Text: Resolution: In section 22.2.4.6 the identifiers RelativeTimeoutPolicy and RelativeReplyTimeoutPolicy both actually should be RelativeRoundtripTimeoutPolicy. Revised Text: In document orbrev/01-03-01 in section 22.2.4.6 substitute RelativeRoundtripTimeoutPolicy for all occurences of RelativeTimeoutPolicy and RelativeReplyTimeoutPolicy. Actions taken: January 13, 2000: received issue October 3, 2001: closed issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== From: Bill Binko To: "'Messaging-Rtf'" Subject: Another bug Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 16:07:39 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-UIDL: L4:!!Y"0e9Ld7e9g1Le9 In the following section, three policy names are used: RelativeRoundtripTimeoutPolicy, RelativeTimeoutPolicy, and RelativeReplyTimeoutPolicy. I believe they all refer to the interface we are defining in this paragraph--RelativeRoundtripTimeoutPolicy. If not, we have Policies that are not defined and a big big problem :) Can we please clean this up by and editorial revision? 5.3.4.6 interface RelativeRoundtripTimeoutPolicy This interface is a local object derived from CORBA::Policy. It is used to indicate the relative amount of time for which a Request or its corresponding Reply may be delivered. After this amount of time the Request is cancelled (if a response has not yet been received from the target) or the Reply is discarded (if the Request had already been delivered and a Reply returned from the target). This policy is applied to both synchronous and asynchronous invocations. When instances of RelativeTimeoutPolicy are created, a value of type TimeBase::TimeT is passed to CORBA::ORB::create_policy. This policy is only applicable as a client-side override. When an instance of RelativeReplyTimeoutPolicy is propagated within a PolicyValue in an INVOCATION_POLICIES Service Context, the ptype has value REPLY_END_TIME_POLICY_TYPE and the pvalue is a CDR encapsulation containing the relative_expiry converted into a TimeBase::UtcT end time (as in the case of ReplyEndTimePolicy). Binko Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 19:07:26 -0500 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 3218 proposed resolution Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-UIDL: 3;Je9nIVd90DT!!!S%e9 Issue 3218: Wrong policy names (messaging-rtf) Click here for this issue's archive. Source: Technical Resource Connection (Mr. Charles W. Binko, bill.binko@trcinc.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: In the following section, three policy names are used: RelativeRoundtripTimeoutPolicy, RelativeTimeoutPolicy, and RelativeReplyTimeoutPolicy. I believe they all refer to the interface we are defining in this paragraph--RelativeRoundtripTimeoutPolicy. If not, we have Policies that are not defined and a big big problem :) Can we please clean this up by and editorial revision? Resolution: In section 22.2.4.6 the identifiers RelativeTimeoutPolicy and RelativeReplyTimeoutPolicy both actually should be RelativeRoundtripTimeoutPolicy. Revised Text: In document orbrev/01-03-01 in section 22.2.4.6 substitute RelativeRoundtripTimeoutPolicy for all occurences of RelativeTimeoutPolicy and RelativeReplyTimeoutPolicy. Actions taken: Incorporate changes and close issue. _____________________________________________________________________________ Unless there is serious objection to the above, this resolution will appear on the next vote. Thanks, Jishnu.