Re: CAP 10: 10.1. CAP Commands (CMD) (ABORT/CONTINUE)

[Lawrence Greenfield <leg+@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

   From: Bruce_Kahn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 15:04:14 -0500
[...]
   What is a good justification for having a command that is unbounded in how 
   long it can take AND has no means for aborting or cancelling it short of 
   actual disconnection from the CS?  Getting my head around that would make 
   swallowing this much easier...

It simplifies implementations. (You do want people to implement this,
right?) What happens if you submit a bounded command (3 seconds,
say), wait 3 seconds, and the server doesn't come back? What if it
doesn't come back in 30 seconds?

What if you submit an unbounded command, wait 1 second, submit a
CANCEL, and the server still hasn't replied in 30 seconds?

What if the network is down or tremendously slow?

[...]
   Still, why invent more stuff if unbounded commands do not make sense given 
   our current model?...  Or if we are going to keep unbounded commands then 
   we really should expreslly codify the way that a CUA terminates them so we 
   have consistant behaviour among all implementations.

How am I, as a client, suppose to know how long something is going to
take the server? Maybe the server is really loaded. Maybe it affects a
lot of data on the server.

The last thing I want, as a server, is for clients to try an operation
for 5 seconds, then try it for 10, then 20, etc., until it's done.

Larry