Issue 3540: Is there an ORB Policy Manager and a Policy Current? (messaging-rtf) Source: UBS (Mr. Hans Kneubuehl, hans.kneubuehl(at)ubs.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: The original CORBA Messaging spec (orbos/98-05-05) defined ORB-level and thread-level policy managers. How do they relate to the policy management framework as defined in CORBA 2.3? The current messaging draft (ptc/00-02-05, chapter 1.2.1) refers to CORBA Core for the definition of the policy management framework. However CORBA 2.3, chapter 4.9.4 Policy Associated with the Execution Environment, only describes that ORB- and thread-associated policy management is defined on a per service base. However, the original messaging spec defined ORB- and thread-associated policy management as a general mechanism, not specific to a particular service, see quote below. Should there be now Messaging-specific policy managers at the ORB- and thread-level or should the current CORBA 2.3 policy management framework be extended to define generic interfaces for ORB- and tread-level policy management? Resolution: close issue, no change Revised Text: Actions taken: April 10, 2000: received issue October 3, 2001: closed issue Discussion: CORBA 2.3 was indeed inconsistent with the Messaging specification since it predates integration of Messaging into the Core. The problem brought up in this issue has been fixed in 2.4 by the incorporation of the text quoted above in CORBA Core section 4.9.2. So this issue can be closed no change. End of Annotations:===== From: hans.kneubuehl@ubs.com X-OpenMail-Hops: 2 Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2000 16:12:49 +0200 Message-Id: Subject: Messaging issue: Is there an ORB Policy Manager and a Policy Current? MIME-Version: 1.0 TO: issues@omg.org, messaging-rtf@omg.org CC: uabcsru@uab.ericsson.se Content-Disposition: inline; filename="BDY.TXT" ;Creation-Date="Mon, 10 Apr 2000 16:12:49 +0200" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by emerald.omg.org id KAA08447 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 ;Creation-Date="Mon, 10 Apr 2000 16:12:49 +0200" X-UIDL: WX&e9112e9&D(e9"2g!! The original CORBA Messaging spec (orbos/98-05-05) defined ORB-level and thread-level policy managers. How do they relate to the policy management framework as defined in CORBA 2.3? The current messaging draft (ptc/00-02-05, chapter 1.2.1) refers to CORBA Core for the definition of the policy management framework. However CORBA 2.3, chapter 4.9.4 Policy Associated with the Execution Environment, only describes that ORB- and thread-associated policy management is defined on a per service base. However, the original messaging spec defined ORB- and thread-associated policy management as a general mechanism, not specific to a particular service, see quote below. Should there be now Messaging-specific policy managers at the ORB- and thread-level or should the current CORBA 2.3 policy management framework be extended to define generic interfaces for ORB- and tread-level policy management? from orbos/98-05-05, chapter 5.2, p. 31 "Client-side Policy management is performed through operations accessible in the following contexts: ORB-level Policies. A locality-constrained PolicyManager is accessible through the ORB interface. This PolicyManager has operations through which a set of Policies can be applied and the current overriding Policy settings can be obtained. Policies applied at the ORB level override any system defaultPolicyManager is obtained through an invocation of ORB::resolve_initial_references, specifying an identifier of s. The OBR. Thread-level Policies. A standard PolicyCurrent is defined with operations for the querying and applying of quality of service values specific to a thread. Policies applied at the thread level override any system defaults or values set at the ORB level. The locality-constrained PolicyCurrent is obtained through an invocation of ORB::resolve_initial_references, specifying an identifier o f. When accessed from a newly spawned thread, the PolicyCurrent initially has no overridden policies. The PolicyCurrent also has no overridden values when a POA with ThreadPolicy of ORB_CONTROL_MODEL dispatches an invocation to a servant. Each time an invocation is dispatched through a SINGLE_THREAD_MODEL POA, the thread-level overrides are reset to have no overridden values." Regards Hans -- Hans Kneubuehl, UBS AG, P.O. Box, 8098 Zurich, Switzerland phone: +41 1 238 28 96, fax: +41 1 238 30 11 Date: Tue, 20 Mar 2001 19:33:01 -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 3540 proposed resolution Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-UIDL: \R5!!Q<1e92+Oe9#nhd9 Issue 3540: Is there an ORB Policy Manager and a Policy Current? (messaging-rtf) Click here for this issue's archive. Source: UBS (Mr. Hans Kneubuehl, hans.kneubuehl@ubs.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: The original CORBA Messaging spec (orbos/98-05-05) defined ORB-level and thread-level policy managers. How do they relate to the policy management framework as defined in CORBA 2.3? The current messaging draft (ptc/00-02-05, chapter 1.2.1) refers to CORBA Core for the definition of the policy management framework. However CORBA 2.3, chapter 4.9.4 Policy Associated with the Execution Environment, only describes that ORB- and thread-associated policy management is defined on a per service base. However, the original messaging spec defined ORB- and thread-associated policy management as a general mechanism, not specific to a particular service, see quote below. Should there be now Messaging-specific policy managers at the ORB- and thread-level or should the current CORBA 2.3 policy management framework be extended to define generic interfaces for ORB- and tread-level policy management? Resolution: CORBA 2.3 was indeed inconsistent with the Messaging specification since it predates integration of Messaging into the Core. The problem brought up in this issue has been fixed in 2.4 by the incorporation of the text quoted above in CORBA Core section 4.9.2. So this issue can be closed no change. Revised Text: Actions taken: Already fixed. Close no change ______________________________________________________________________ Unless there is strong objection to the proposal above, this will appear in the next Core RTF vote. Thanks, Jishnu.