> In order to apply the priority mechanism, we effectively have to retain
the
> information for ephemeral state about who installed it.  This is
particularly
> true given the agreement that all clients will have unique priorities.

If all clients must have unique priorities, why do we need to use this
information in the priority mechanism?

> Given that, it seems simple and useful to always include that installer in
the
> list of people who receive a notification that the modification has been
over-
> written.  For one thing, that avoids any kind of race condition where the
> over-ride could occur before the creator has a chance to add his
notification
> request.

It is useful -- I'm not arguing that we shouldn't do this _by default_, only
that we shouldn't make this mechanism separate from any other pub/sub. It
would seem to be easier to have one mechanism that's common, rather than
multiples... I would say -- mandate it by default, but allow the client to
turn it off if it wants after the state has been installed. This keeps the
mechanism the same across all clients.

:-)

Russ
 


_______________________________________________
i2rs mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2rs

Reply via email to