On 2 November 2017 at 17:47, Gordon Sim <g...@redhat.com> wrote: > On 02/11/17 15:10, Robbie Gemmell wrote: >> >> I think you might be approaching this from a slightly different view >> than what Lorenz originally was. > > > Oops, sorry! > >> The '|suffix' bit of the name isn't the main thing Lorenz is raising I >> believe, but rather that the container-id associated with a particular >> connnection without a ClientID set may be used to create a link to >> access a subscription, and then that link not used again since >> connections without a ClientID set get a random container-id. The >> actual link names aren't important to that aspect, just that the >> container-id can change and potentially not be reused. > > > Ok I understand. > >> With the queue itself being the main state this wasnt really seen as >> an issue, but the unsettled map is in interesting point, and an >> annoying one given no client (or other server) uses it currently that >> I can think. > > > If the client doesn't retain its container id it cannot resume a link > anyway. > >
Right, and it isnt really trying to, but thats the concern as the broker doesnt necessarily think it wont. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@qpid.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@qpid.apache.org
