[Sis-ams] AMS RID BNSC-16

[Scott Burleigh]

Our first residual RID is this one:

    "Each RAMS gateway subscribes locally to all subjects that are of
    interest".  So the RAMS gateway acts as a proxy to nodes in other
    continuum that are interested in particular subjects.

    Latter in the book, the concept of envelopes is introduced. Why does
    AMS treat messages to other continuum different? Surely this
    functionality should be localised to the RAMS gateway itself. As far
    as the publishing/sending node is concerned, the RAMS gateway should
    be treated as any other node.

My proposed disposition is this:

    Not accepted, as it's unclear what change is requested.  For
    published messages the RAMS gateway is indeed treated in the same
    way as any other node.  Envelopes are needed for messages that are
    sent to nodes in remote continua.  This is because RAMS forwarding
    is in some ways a kind of "routing" and the AMS message is not a
    routable structure: it lacks destination, which the envelope
    supplies.  For published messages the RAMS gateway itself
    encapsulates the message in an envelope for forwarding, but for
    private messages the source node must do it because it alone knows
    the destination.

We didn't talk about this one in detail, mostly because it could involve 
an in-depth discussion of RAMS that would have crowded out a lot of 
other items.  Stuart, does this disposition make sense to you?  If not, 
are there some specific points we can zero in on to reach a consensus?

Scott



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ccsds.org/pipermail/sis-ams/attachments/20071017/7a67aede/attachment.htm