Comment on section 3.3.4, Messaging Service Spec v0-1

[Jim Hughes <jfh@fs.fujitsu.com>]

Rather than have an extended discussion now on the contents of the "RM 
Spec" (even if it isn't 'reliable', according to individual 
interpretations!), I think the proper conclusion to Change Request 137 is 
to have three values for the ReliableMessagingInfo element:

1) "None" - meaning, ebXML semantics are silent

2) "AtMostOnce" - meaning, refer to the "reliable messaging spec" for what 
the Sending MSH and Receiving MSH will do. Yes, there are overtones to the 
term "AtMostOnce", but as opposed to "SeeRMSpec", "AtMostOnce" is a better 
value, IMHO. I think we can require that all compliant MSHs must support 
this value for interoperability.

3) "TPAdefined" - (or similar) meaning, through the TPA or some other 
means, the two MSHs will agree to use some underlying transport's 
reliability semantics, whether or not some kind of ACK is expected. Support 
of this value is obviously MSH-implementation dependent.

Comments?

Jim