[Css-csts] Inconsistent specification of states for services withstateless prime procedure

[Martin Götzelmann]

Dear John,

I do not recall that the issue you are addressing was discussed explicitly. In my view, the statement in section 2 is a logical consequence of the decision that procedures that include only one invocation of a single two-way operation are to be considered state-less, which to me means that there is no state we can talk about.

We have said that the state of the prime procedure determines the sub-states of the bound state of the service. If the prime procedure has no state then it seems logical to me that the bound state of the service has no sub-states.

My understanding was that section 2 would replace the Annex A and that Yves has therefore not updated it. However, I am not certain and Yves would need to comment on this. 

Kind Regards,
Martin

-----Original Message-----
From: css-csts-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org [mailto:css-csts-bounces at mailman.ccsds.org] On Behalf Of John Pietras
Sent: 26 March 2008 19:17
To: css-csts at mailman.ccsds.org
Subject: [Css-csts] Inconsistent specification of states for services withstateless prime procedure

Members of the CSTSWG ---

There is an inconsistency between what the v0.12 draft of the Procedures Definition and the Draft 6 update of Section 2 (Description of the CSTS Specification Framework, written by Martin) have to say about the states of services that have stateless prime procedures.

Section 3.1.5 of the v0.12 Draft Procedures Definition states that CSTSes always have the 'ready' and 'active' substates of the 'bound'
state. In Annex A the last sentence of bullet (b) states "For a stateless type of prime procedure, the transition to service state 2.2
('active') will occur after invocation of its operation", and the last sentence of bullet (c) states "For a stateless type of prime procedure, the service continues in this [active] state until the last on-going operation is returned."

However, in the Draft 6 update of Section 2, the third paragraph states "If the prime procedure is stateful the state bound has two sub-states ready and active. ...  If the prime procedure is stateless then the service state bound has no sub-states."

Was this discrepancy discussed at Crystal City, and if so what was the outcome? That is, does a service with a stateless prime procedure have ready and active substates (as stated in the v0.12 Procedures
Definition) or does the service simply stay in the 'bound' state until it is unbound?

Thanks.

Best regards,
John

John Pietras
Global Science & Technology, Inc. (GST)
7855 Walker Drive
Suite 200
Greenbelt, Maryland, USA
20770-3239
Direct:   +1-240-542-1155
GST Main: +1-301-474-9696
Fax:      +1-301-474-5970


_______________________________________________
Css-csts mailing list
Css-csts at mailman.ccsds.org
http://mailman.ccsds.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/css-csts

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________