Issue 5624: Spec doesn't make clear what is valid mix of policies and what is invalid (corba-rtf) Source: Floorboard Software (Mr. Jonathan Biggar, jon(at)floorboard.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: The spec doesn't make it clear what is a valid mix of policies and what is invalid. For example, should it be legal to set a RequestPriorityPolicy, MaxHopsPolicy or QueueOrderingPolicy value if the RoutingPolicy is ROUTE_NONE? Also, should setting both RequestEndTimePolicy and RelativeRequestTimeoutPolicy be illegal? Or must the client/server pick which ever one expires first? Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: September 1, 2002: received issue April 11, 2012: Deferred Discussion: End of Annotations:===== Sender: jon@floorboard.com Date: Sun, 01 Sep 2002 18:28:19 -0700 From: Jonathan Biggar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.7 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en To: issues@omg.org, core-rtf@omg.org Subject: CORBA Messaging issues Issue 6: The spec doesn't make it clear what is a valid mix of policies and what is invalid. For example, should it be legal to set a RequestPriorityPolicy, MaxHopsPolicy or QueueOrderingPolicy value if the RoutingPolicy is ROUTE_NONE? Also, should setting both RequestEndTimePolicy and RelativeRequestTimeoutPolicy be illegal? Or must the client/server pick which ever one expires first? Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2002 17:44:58 -0500 From: Jishnu Mukerji Organization: Software Global Business Unit, Hewlett-Packard X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: corba-rtf@omg.org Subject: Discussion 5624 My take on the items below are in paragraphs that are encapsulated within pair: Issue 5624: Spec doesn't make clear what is valid mix of policies and what is invalid (corba-rtf) Click http://cgi.omg.org/issues/issue5624.txt for this issue's archive. Source: Floorboard Software (Mr. Jonathan Biggar, jon@floorboard.com) Nature: Uncategorized Issue Severity: Summary: The spec doesn't make it clear what is a valid mix of policies and what is invalid. For example, should it be legal to set a RequestPriorityPolicy, MaxHopsPolicy or QueueOrderingPolicy value if the RoutingPolicy is ROUTE_NONE? I don't see any reason for saying anything about it. Since nothing is said it is obviously legal, and if ROUTE_NONE is set then naturally no routing related policies are actively applicable. Also, should setting both RequestEndTimePolicy and RelativeRequestTimeoutPolicy be illegal? Or must the client/server pick which ever one expires first? I think there is no reason to make this illegal, although it would be a good idea to specify whether the one that expires first or the one that expires last is applicable when there are multiple policies in effect. Comments? Thoughts? Jishnu. Sender: jon@floorboard.com Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2002 19:06:05 -0800 From: Jonathan Biggar X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.8 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.7 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en To: Jishnu Mukerji CC: corba-rtf@omg.org Subject: Re: Discussion 5624 Jishnu Mukerji wrote: > > My take on the items below are in paragraphs that are encapsulated > within pair: > > Issue 5624: Spec doesn't make clear what is valid mix of policies and > what is > invalid (corba-rtf) > > Click http://cgi.omg.org/issues/issue5624.txt for this issue's archive. > Source: Floorboard Software (Mr. Jonathan Biggar, jon@floorboard.com) > Nature: Uncategorized Issue > Severity: > Summary: > > The spec doesn't make it clear what is a valid mix of policies and what > is invalid. For example, should it be legal to set a > RequestPriorityPolicy, MaxHopsPolicy or QueueOrderingPolicy value if the > RoutingPolicy is ROUTE_NONE? > > > I don't see any reason for saying anything about it. Since nothing is > said it is obviously legal, and if ROUTE_NONE is set then naturally no > routing related policies are actively applicable. > > > Also, should setting both RequestEndTimePolicy and > RelativeRequestTimeoutPolicy be illegal? Or must the client/server pick > which ever one expires first? > > > I think there is no reason to make this illegal, although it would be a > good idea to specify whether the one that expires first or the one that > expires last is applicable when there are multiple policies in effect. > > > Comments? Thoughts? Here's another couple to consider. What if the request start time is set to later than the request end time or reply end time, or the reply start time is set to later than the reply end time? What if the QueueOrderingPolicy is set to PRIORITY and no priority policies are set? Or set to TEMPORAL and no end time policies are set? -- Jon Biggar Floorboard Software jon@floorboard.com jon@biggar.org Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2002 11:33:59 -0500 From: Jishnu Mukerji Organization: Software Global Business Unit, Hewlett-Packard X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en To: Jonathan Biggar , Chris Smith Cc: corba-rtf@omg.org Subject: Re: Discussion 5624 Jon, How about creating a list of all cases that need clarfication and nail 'em all in a single resolution of this issue. Will you help me create this list. I think we have a start with the four items so far. While doing so also take a look at Issue 3770. Perhaps we should fold it into this exercise of what happens with various mix of policies. Chris, it would help a lot if you contrubuted to this discussion too. Thanks, Jishnu. Jonathan Biggar wrote: > > Jishnu Mukerji wrote: > > > > My take on the items below are in paragraphs that are encapsulated > > within pair: > > > > Issue 5624: Spec doesn't make clear what is valid mix of policies and > > what is > > invalid (corba-rtf) > > > > Click http://cgi.omg.org/issues/issue5624.txt for this issue's archive. > > Source: Floorboard Software (Mr. Jonathan Biggar, jon@floorboard.com) > > Nature: Uncategorized Issue > > Severity: > > Summary: > > > > The spec doesn't make it clear what is a valid mix of policies and what > > is invalid. For example, should it be legal to set a > > RequestPriorityPolicy, MaxHopsPolicy or QueueOrderingPolicy value if the > > RoutingPolicy is ROUTE_NONE? > > > > > > I don't see any reason for saying anything about it. Since nothing is > > said it is obviously legal, and if ROUTE_NONE is set then naturally no > > routing related policies are actively applicable. > > > > > > Also, should setting both RequestEndTimePolicy and > > RelativeRequestTimeoutPolicy be illegal? Or must the client/server pick > > which ever one expires first? > > > > > > I think there is no reason to make this illegal, although it would be a > > good idea to specify whether the one that expires first or the one that > > expires last is applicable when there are multiple policies in effect. > > > > > > Comments? Thoughts? > > Here's another couple to consider. What if the request start time is > set to later than the request end time or reply end time, or the reply > start time is set to later than the reply end time? > > What if the QueueOrderingPolicy is set to PRIORITY and no priority > policies are set? Or set to TEMPORAL and no end time policies are set? > > -- > Jon Biggar > Floorboard Software > jon@floorboard.com > jon@biggar.org -- Jishnu Mukerji Senior Systems Architect 1001 Frontier Road, Suite 300 Technology Office Bridgewater NJ 08807, USA Software Global Business Unit Tel: +1 908 243 8924 Hewlett-Packard Company Fax: +1 908 243 8850 mailto: jishnu@hp.com