At 12:39 PM 5/30/02 -0500, Andre Beck wrote:
> How far is asynchrony to be taken? In particular, I'm wondering if
> it is to be possible for a response to be received on a channel
> different from the request. (E.g. suppose a channel between data
> dispatcher and callout processor fails, and is re-established - can
> an outstanding response arrive on the re-established channel?)
Hm, good question, anybody any opinions on that?
Our main motivation for requiring support for asynchronous message
exchange was to allow for parallel callout transactions over a single
callout channel. I am not yet convinced that we need to extend the
asynchrony requirement to include scenarios like the one you described,
but if there are good arguments for it, then we can certainly do so.
I don't have a strong view, just trying to clarify the extent of the
requirement.
#g
-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK(_at_)NineByNine(_dot_)org>