Re: Reliability of RPC services

[Marcus Brinkmann]

At Tue, 25 Apr 2006 11:29:54 -0400,
"Jonathan S. Shapiro" <address@hidden> wrote:
> Here is an enumeration of the properties that people have talked about.

I want to extend by one term:

      receive exactly once: A caller will get exactly one reply
      message, eventually.

My motivation is that this, combined with notice of non-reference,
_is_ compatible with network transparency.  Considering only a local
machine, send exactly once and receive exactly once are identical.

Just for the record: My current position has not changed from the very
first mail I wrote that started this thread, where I asked:

 1) Is RPC robustness desirable/required, or is an alternative model
    feasible where machine-local RPC is as unreliable as IP/UDP network
    communication?

The question is as open as before.

I have also said a lot about how I would define reply capabilities if
I were to implement them similar to Mach, with which we have some
experience.  But this should not be confused with a decision that
these are the semantics I want to have.

Thanks,
Marcus