RE: Different Levels of Reliable Messaging

Mark

The email you referenced says ...

>My belief is that the problem is "reliable coordination".  That is,
>how do two pieces of software distributed on an unreliable network,
>coordinate to achieve some goal in a reliable manner (such that both
>know that the goal has been achieved or failed, etc..)?  So I see
>"reliable messaging" as just one possible solution to that problem.

The problem is that it is not always "just to pieces of software". For
example, you could have some legacy system that just does not know how to
coordinate its behavior with some other software on the network. Making it
do this is hard and would probably be prohibitively expenseive.

On the other hand if your "front end" you legacy system with a solution that
can do reliable messaging, then you can get many of the benefits of
"reliable coordination" much more easily.

I agree though that ultimately "relilable coordination" will often be
needed.

David


-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Baker [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, December 12, 2002 9:32 PM
To: Burdett, David
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Different Levels of Reliable Messaging


On Thu, Dec 12, 2002 at 02:48:31PM -0800, Burdett, David wrote:
> LEVEL 5 - Reliable Processing
> -----------------------------

I was happy to see this listed (though not so much with your
suggestions for what to do about it 8-).

Without rehashing old arguments, I'll just provide a pointer to a
previous post of mine which says why I think this is the only level we
really need to concern ourselves with;

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Jul/0125

MB
-- 
Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis