[GRAAP-WG] Re-negotiation Protocol Proposal

[Toshiyuki Nakata]

Hi Again:
> I wouldn't say slide 7 captures my comment.  My endpoint rendering
> doesn't imply a third entity, just that the responder entity is
> rendered with multiple endpoints to allow a more general scenario such
> as renegotiation that could combine multiple agreements (something you
> couldn't do if the preceding agreement is always implied like the
> "this" pointer in a simple object system):
> 
>  1.  agreement initiator  sends offer  to agreement factory
> 
>  2.  agreement factory  sends accept  (sync or async reply)
> 
>  ... repeat 1-2 for multiple agreements...
> 
>  3.  renegotiation initiator  sends offer  to agreement factory 
> 
>  4.  agreement factory  sends accept   (sync or async reply)
>

These are somethngs I can guess and feel provide an elegant solution, 
but I feel that the implicit 
messages needed here between the Agreement Responder and the
Agreement Factory would needed to be spelt out or (My guess) would always,
fail..


#Karl please tell me that I'm wrong...

So for the moment, I personally  feel that a more simple 
protocol either using PendingXXX would be better..

#Your thoughts everyone :-)
Best Regards
Toshi @ safely moved from freezing East Coast US to a warmer Silicon Valley


-----
Toshiyuki Nakata 中田　登志之
Executive Chief Engineer, Central Research Lab. NEC
1753, Shimonumabe, Nakahara-Ku,
Kawasaki,Kanagawa 211-8666,Japan
Tel +81-44-431-7653 (NEC Internal 22-60035)
Fax +81-44-431-7609 (NEC Internal 22-60509)