Subject: [Simple] draft-ietf-simple-partial-publish-03 - composer's treatment of a partial publish requests

From: "Anat Angel" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 10:38:08 +0200

Hi

The question I have is about the exact meaning of a <remove> operation
for the composer: 

When a certain device sends partial PUBLISH that includes <remove> to a
certain tuple, does it tell the composer that:

Option A: This device does not know what the status of that tuple is.
Therefore the composer needs to send other information it might have
about this tuple from other devices to the watchers?

Option B: All other information that it might have about that tuple
(from other devices that also send PUBLISH requests) is not relevant any
more and future notifications should not include it?

The scenario is best explained in the following example:

Composer gets 2 INITIAL PUBLISH requests (from 2 different devices) to
the same presentity.

Device A sends PUBLISH with 1 tuple with id: tuple1.

Device B sends (after A) a PUBLISH with also 1 tuple with id: tuple1

The composer sends a first NOTIFY with full-pidf of tuple1 that it got
from device B (because it's more recent)

This is based on approach that information inside a more recent PUBLISH
is more updated.

Now device A sends a MODIFY PUBLISH with <remove> of tuple1 and <add>
tuple2.

What should now be the content of a FULL NOTIFY sent by the composer to
watchers?

The options can be:

-          Option A: Composer sends the updated tuple2 + the tuple1
information that it has from B.

-          Option B: Composer sends just the updated tuple2 data.

If we remember that the behavior should be equivalent to the behavior of
a FULL MODIFY PUBLISH request (instead of the partial request above)
that includes just tuple2 (because the intention is the same) - than
option A is more logical.

The question is not about the composition policy - it's about the
"intention" of the publisher when sending PUBLISH requests that are
partial.

Regards,

Anat

_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple

---

From: Jari Urpalainen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 24 Nov 2005 13:27:17 +0200

>Now device A sends a MODIFY PUBLISH with <remove> of tuple1 and <add>
which is equivalent, if device A had sent a full publish only with 
<tuple2> (which might be even a smaller payload btw). Partial publish 
updates are always understood in the context of "patching the full 
pidf", i.e. to save bandwidth.

>option A is more logical.
right.

>"intention" of the publisher when sending PUBLISH requests that are
imo, this is just about the composition policy, so the actual implementation decides whether the A or B option is selected. B is simpler to implement but A might be more reasonable in general.
br,
Jari