Re: message handling

William J. Mills wrote:

>You must send a RPY or an ANS/NUL sequence.  It is the correct behavior
>not to process the next MSG before the previous message is completed.
>  
>
Yes, I found this in the rfc. But, does this mean that it can be send
but will remain in queue untill the previous message is sent or does
this mean that it is illegal to send a message untill the previous has
had a valid reply?

And should a BEEP implemetation prevent the second massage being sent?

>-bill
>
>On Tue, Jul 05, 2005 at 05:17:49PM +0200, Daan Hoogland wrote:
>  
>
>>LS,
>>
>>A collegue of mine wrote a patch to beepcore-java's ChannelImpl. The
>>issue we had was that it was not possible to not reply to a message and
>>then send a second message from the same peer. The specifications say
>>that it should be possible to send zero (or more) replies, so we felt
>>this patch was legal. Any ideas anybody?
>>    
>>

-- 
<insert value="your favorite astute quote" id="sigquote" />
-----------------------------
Daan Hoogland
software architect
-----------------------------
[email protected]
0620442544
www.luminis.nl
-----------------------------
<or ref="sigquote" />



-------------------------------------------------------
SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies
from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles,
informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to
speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click