RE: Reliable messaging

I know of mechanisms that, if successful, will assure the sender that the
message HAS been received. I do not know of any mechanism that will allow
the sender to know that the message has NOT been received. The ebXML spec
most certainly does not. So I believe that the word "whether" below is
inappropriate.
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher B Ferris [mailto:chrisfer@us.ibm.com] 
Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2002 3:25 PM
To: Mark Baker
Cc: Burdett, David; www-ws-arch@w3.org; www-ws-arch-request@w3.org
Subject: Re: Reliable messaging
#1 in my definition reads: 
the ability of a sender to be able to determine whether a given 
message has been received by its intended receiver ... 
It doesn't speak of a mechanism, but there are many means of achieving this.
Cheers, 
Christopher Ferris
Architect, Emerging e-business Industry Architecture
email: chrisfer@us.ibm.com
phone: +1 508 234 3624 
www-ws-arch-request@w3.org wrote on 08/29/2002 04:01:41 PM:
> 
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2002 at 11:48:41AM -0700, Burdett, David wrote:
> > I like your definitions, however, they do not address what I think is
the
> > certainty that although you can be sure a message was received, you can
> > never be absolutely sure that it was not.
> 
> How can you be sure that a message was received? Because there's always
> a chance that the response to a message doesn't make it, and leaves the
> two parties out of synch (i.e. two army problem).
> 
> MB
> -- 
> Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred)
> Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. distobj@acm.org
> http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.idokorro.com
>