Issue 9737: Mandatory in Binding class (qos4ccm-ftf) Source: Fraunhofer FOKUS (Mr. Tom Ritter, tom.ritter@fokus.fraunhofer.de) Nature: Clarification Severity: Minor Summary: Mandatory in Binding class Its not clear what mandatory means. What does it mean for a Binding to exist but not be bound? Resolution: More detailed text has been added to explain that. Revised Text: The following the following text has been added at the end of 7.2.2.1: If this attribute is set to false, the binding needs not to be valid all the time. This can be useful for systems in phases where fewer resources are available and even the handling of QoS bindings would imply major decrease of system performance. QoS bindings which are not mandatory can be temporarily disabled. Actions taken: May 18, 2006: received issue January 15, 2008: closed issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== m: webmaster@omg.org Date: 18 May 2006 04:13:19 -0400 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: Tom Ritter Company: Fraunhofer FOKUS mailFrom: ritter@fokus.fraunhofer.de Notification: Yes Specification: QoS4CCM Section: 7.2.2 FormalNumber: ptc/06-04-15 Version: final adopted RevisionDate: April/2006 Page: 7 pp. Nature: Clarification Severity: Minor HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.0.3) Gecko/20060426 Firefox/1.5.0.3 Description Mandatory in Binding class Its not clear what mandatory means. What does it mean for a Binding to exist but not be bound? Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 09:59:20 +0200 From: Tom Ritter User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (Windows/20070509) To: qos4ccm-ftf@omg.org Subject: proposed solution to issue 9737 X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Aug 2007 07:59:17.0589 (UTC) FILETIME=[037D9850:01C7DE49] X-Fraunhofer-Email-Policy: accepted Dear FTF memebers, I would propose the following solution to the issue 9737. Please respond if you have any comments on this issue and the proposed solution. Cheers, Tom The following text will be added at the end of 7.2.2.1: If this attribute is set to false, the binding needs not to be valid all the time. This can be useful for systems in phases where fewer resources are available and even the handling of QoS bindings would imply major decrease of system performance. QoS bindings which are not mandatory can be temporarily disabled. -- Tom Ritter Head of Working Area Model-Driven Engineering Fraunhofer FOKUS Kaiserin-Augusta-Allee 31 10589 Berlin, Germany +49 30 3463 - 7278 (fon), - 8000 (fax) mailto:ritter@fokus.fraunhofer.de http://www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/usr/ritter Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 12:13:43 +0200 From: Ansgar Radermacher User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.12 (X11/20070606) To: Tom Ritter Cc: qos4ccm-ftf@omg.org Subject: Re: proposed solution to issue 9737 Hi Tom, having this additional section is a good step in the right direction. However, it is still not fully clear to me what temporarily disabled bindings mean: is it possible that an implementation of a component type could disable QoS features on an existing connection or that it might support QoS features during one negotiation and not in a later one (without touching existing connections). But maybe it's just me Ansgar Tom Ritter wrote: Dear FTF memebers, I would propose the following solution to the issue 9737. Please respond if you have any comments on this issue and the proposed solution. Cheers, Tom The following text will be added at the end of 7.2.2.1: If this attribute is set to false, the binding needs not to be valid all the time. This can be useful for systems in phases where fewer resources are available and even the handling of QoS bindings would imply major decrease of system performance. QoS bindings which are not mandatory can be temporarily disabled. -- Ansgar Radermacher CEA/DRT/LIST http://www-list.cea.fr/index.htm http://www2.cs.unibw.de/alumni/Ansgar/ phone: +33 16908 3812 mailto: ansgar.radermacher@cea.fr