On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 4:48 PM, Jeffrey Haas <[email protected]> wrote:
> Joel, > > On Mon, Jul 13, 2015 at 07:34:42PM -0400, Joel M. Halpern wrote: > > To amplify my previous reply on priority, priority is associated > > with the I2RS Client. it does not change even if the client is > > acting on behalf of multiple secondary identities. (If the use case > > requires that variability, use multiple primary identities, with > > separate sessions.) > > To attempt to reduce this to an example: > Basis case: Multiple clients speaking directly to an agent. Clients have > distinct priorities. Priority causes config to tie-break appropriately > among the various client interactions. > > Proxy case: Agent is against as "root" from a proxy, potentially with the > a single priority. As long as the proxy maintains the tie-breaking as if > it > had implemented the agent operations, it's okay that the resultant nodes > may > have the same priority associated with them? > > Gloss: We still haven't concluded our discussion as to whether the nodes > are > decorated as "owned by an identity" or "have a priority". > > Note that the gloss has an interesting impact. If nodes are expected to > get > their priority via identity, this makes things very messy if you don't > maintain multiple identities to have distinct priorities in the proxy case. > > But the secondary identity is just extra meta-data to be stored by the agent. If there is a priority associated with each secondary client then that becomes the client-id. The design does not directly support different priorities per broker. The broker needs to pretend to be different clients, and each session will have a different client-id and priority. This is non-optimal but not broken. -- Jeff > Andy
_______________________________________________ i2rs mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs
