OASIS ebXML Messaging Services TC

 View Only

Re: [ebxml-msg] Section 3.1.6.4 TimeToLiveElement

  • 1.  Re: [ebxml-msg] Section 3.1.6.4 TimeToLiveElement

    Posted 12-13-2001 09:20
    
    Dan,
    
    You make some excellent points.
    
    I suspect that MSH builders will be much more concerned about the
    complexity of implementing a large repertoire of error messages than about
    the cost of sending one occasionally.  On a project earlier in my career,
    we had defined a large repertoire of error messages.  Then the implementers
    told us that the were going to process most of them in exactly the same
    way.  They saw no value in doing fine-grained analysis of the error
    conditions.  We quickly agreed on a much smaller number of more generic
    error messages.  This could be the same situation even if there were not
    the ambiguity of the receiving the duplicate message that exceeded time to
    live.
    
    Regards,
    Marty
    
    *************************************************************************************
    
    Martin W. Sachs
    IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
    P. O. B. 704
    Yorktown Hts, NY 10598
    914-784-7287;  IBM tie line 863-7287
    Notes address:  Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM
    Internet address:  mwsachs @ us.ibm.com
    *************************************************************************************
    
    
    
    Dan Weinreb <dlw@exceloncorp.com> on 12/12/2001 10:16:35 AM
    
    Please respond to Dan Weinreb <dlw@exceloncorp.com>
    
    To:    david@drummondgroup.com
    cc:    david.burdett@commerceone.com, ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org
    Subject:    Re: [ebxml-msg] Section 3.1.6.4 TimeToLiveElement
    
    
    
       Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 08:39:29 -0600
       From: David Fischer <david@drummondgroup.com>
    
       +1
    
       Except a receiving MSH does not just ignore a message passed TTL, it
       sends back
       an error -- TimeToLiveExpired.
    
    As I think I've said before, it's not clear to me that there's much
    value in sending back an error message in this case.  What's the From
    MSH going to do when it gets such an error message?  I guess it could
    use it to record metering statistics that somebody might look at.
    
    (Note that the From MSH cannot assume, from receiving such an error
    message, that the original message did not get through.  Maybe the
    original message got through very quickly just fine, but also a
    duplicate was generated, and the duplicate arrived much later.)
    
    I'm not sure the cost of the error message is worth the benefit.
    But presumably this won't happen often, so the performance cost
    is low, so it's harmless.
    
    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
    manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>