Re: question about transaction operation in ForCES protocol draft!

On Tue, 2007-25-12 at 10:30 +0800, Chuanhuang Li wrote:
> Dear jamal:
>         I think it is not only an optimization,it may affact the
> Interoperation between ForCES protocol stacks implemented by different
> companies,if the protocol hasn't given a clear description!

There should be no interop problems if you read the draft: it states to
always send the TRCOMP.
You mention that in the case of failure there may be no need to send a
TRCOMP to the failed FE. That is an optimization from what we have
stated, because you send one less message to the failed FE. We dont want
to add new features to the protocol at this stage.

If you feel strongly that some text is not clear in the draft, please
send the text you feel will clarify the issue to Avri - but please dont
add any new extensions to the protocol. Given future operational
experience we could make changes in future revisions of the protocol.

cheers,
jamal