Subject: RE: Correspondence between requests and replies in messages

From: "Tulpule, Naren" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 12:53:42 -0700

Hi Paul,
  the message is a transport mechanism. Each transaction (request / reply /
pending / ack) is independent. Transaction IDs can correlate request with
replies.
  Did we figure out how to handle a transaction > 64 KB without returning
error? If so, can someone please tell me the way to do it? If not, what is
the error code to return if a reply (probably audit reply) is going to
exceed 64 KB?

These views are mine alone, not those of Intel or Trillium.
-- Naren
Narendra C. Tulpule         310-442-9222
SMTS, Trillium (an Intel company)
12100 Wilshire Bl #1800 Los Angeles CA 90025
It IS as bad as you think, and THEY are out to get you.

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Long [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 12:20 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Correspondence between requests and replies in messages

Do transaction replies have to be placed in a message the same way as the
corresponding requests? I can't find anything in the standard that addresses
this. There are two interesting scenarios here. First, if a message contains
more than one transaction request, must the replies be contained within a
single message, as in the following?

A, B, C ->
<- A', B', C'

Or could they be returned in multiple messages, like so?

A, B, C ->
<- A', B'
<- C'

Secondly, can a message contain replies to requests contained in more than
one message, as in the following?

A ->
B ->
<- A', B'

I guess what it comes down to is this: Is a message merely a transport
mechanism that otherwise has no relevance to transactions? If this is true,
Nagle's algorithm could be used for transmitting replies within messages,
correct? And if it is also true that requests, replies, pendings, and
response-acks may be mixed in any combination within a message (haven't seen
a response to my query about that yet), Nagle's algorithm could also be used
for transmitting all of these and not just replies. Comments? Answers?

Paul Long
ipDialog, Inc.

---

From: "Paul Long" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 15:51:51 -0500

Naren,

Okay, thanks. So the following two prototypical examples are both valid,
correct?

A, B, C ->
<- A', B'
<- C'

and

A ->
B ->
<- A', B'

What about my query regarding mixing requests, replies, pendings, and
response acks in a message? If a message is indeed just a transport
mechanism, they can be mixed in any combination in a message, correct?
Therefore, the following scenario is also valid (e.g., A' is the reply to
the A request).

A, B, C ->
<- A', X, C'
X' ->
D ->
<- Y, D', B'
-> Y'

As an extreme, I suppose a simple entity could always place one request,
reply, pending, or response ack per message.

As you might guess :-), I don't know the answer to your ">64KB" query. Good
luck.

Paul Long
ipDialog, Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: Tulpule, Naren [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Monday, April 30, 2001 2:54 PM
To: 'Paul Long'; [email-masked]
Subject: RE: Correspondence between requests and replies in messages

Hi Paul,