Re: SequenceNumber [was:minutes 21-Dec-2000 tr&p con-call]

[SHIMAMURA Masayoshi <shima.masa@jp.fujitsu.com>]

Mr. David Burdett, 

Thank you for refining the specification. I found only typo and minor
issues. I show my modification idea in Word file. Please see attached
Word file and following comments.

- line 18: I think "not specified" is unclear description. I'd like to
  suggest changing to "not used".
- line 28: It seems to me that line 28 should be joined to line 29
  (I deleted newline between line 28 and 29).
- line 87-89: In previous POC demo, a vendor's SequenceNumber
  implementation was invalid. In the implementation, SequenceNumber is
  incremented in retry sequence. So I added following sentence to avoid
  such misunderstanding:
        "When the From Party MSH re-sends same message again in retry
        sequence, the From Party MSH MUSH identify same SequenceNumber
        which was used for the message in first sending of the message."
- please see attached file for other typo.

On Sun, 14 Jan 2001 19:06:48 -0800
"Burdett, David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com> wrote:
> Shimamura-san
> 
> In the F2F meeting last week it was agreed to include:
> 1. messageOrderSemantics in the ReliableMessagingInfo element (now renamed
> QualityOfServiceInfo)
> 2. SequenceNumber - but at the message rather than the routing header level.
> 
> The attached document is contains a slightly tweaked version of your
> document, please let me know if you have any comments.
> 
> Regards
> 
> David 

Regards, 

--
SHIMAMURA Masayoshi <shima.masa@jp.fujitsu.com>
TEL:+81-45-476-4590(ext.7128-4241)  FAX:+81-45-476-4726(ext.7128-6783)
Planning Dep., Strategic Planning Div., Software Group, FUJITSU LIMITED

Modification_to_MS32 DB.doc