It seems to me that we have all at least implicitly agreed that depositing
a message in the persistent store constitutes delivery to the application
(not unlike the postal service delivering a letter to a post office box).
That's the event that should be governed by time to live.
See my previous posting.
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
*************************************************************************************
"Burdett, David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com> on 12/11/2001 06:17:24 PM
To: ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org
cc:
Subject: RE: [ebxml-msg] Section 3.1.6.4 TimeToLiveElement
I agree with Doug
The original intent behind TimeToLive is that it should indicate the time
by
which the message should be delivered to the application. Consider the use
case where the To Party MSH stores messages which, at the end of the day,
they forward in batch to an application. If we make the semantics mean that
the message will be processed, then, as Doug says, you can't send back the
acknowledgement until the message has been passed to the app.
I think it is completely valid to:
1. Send a delivery receipt to indicate that the message has been received
by
the To Party MSH
2. Later send an error message to indicate the the To Party MSH could not
deliver the message to the App before TimeToLive expired.
A delivery receipt is just that a receipt for **delivery** it is not an
indication that the message has been processed. That can only be provided
by
the application.
David