[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Requirements Categorisation
1 ) I think we should at least all agree on how the architecture
should work with all aspects of oneway/twoway/incremental, comsumer/supplier then we can implements subsets.
2) As far as transactions are concerned I agree with you on how it should work but will have to fully understand the new transaction draft and its impact here. If you asked me I'm sorry if I missed responding to you.
3) ACLs should be in there, I believe that authorization should cover that but I'm sure it should be made more clearly.
>>> "John Merrells" <merrells@xxxxxxxxxxxx> 04/16 6:48 PM >>>
Sanjay Jain wrote:
> > B) ----------- Replication Protocol -----------
> > 13.2) MUST allow initiator to determine if it is a supplier or consumer.
> Should it be specified in the replication agreement or should it be
> determined at the replication updates exchange time ?
I believe that the Replication Agreement should specify this. But, I don'tthink an architecture should have to implement all
the combinations of:
one-way/two-way, full/incremental update, and consumer/supplier.
> > 23) SHOULD support transactions.
> What does that mean ? Does it mean that either all replication updates are
> applied at the consumer site or none ?
I asked about this, but haven't received a response. My interpretation is that
if we support transactions, then we must faithfully repliciate each transaction
as a transaction.
> Have we covered somewhere the requirement that the relevant meta
> information e.g. relevant ACLs should also be transfered from the supplier
> to the consumer ?
There is no mention of access control in the requirements. I think we should
have a statement in there regarding this. Part of the Replication Session
initiation should include some handshaking about what access control models
are supported. An administrator may wish to only allow replciation to occur
with foreign servers which can apply that administrators access control policy.