> My assumption is that things move up the queue based on time and the 
> removal of old and completed entries. So there could indeed 
> be an entry 
> at the top of the queue for which there is no subscription and so no 
> notification. In that situation I would assume that you would 
> notify the 
> next lower entry in the queue that has a subscription, and accept the 
> resulting call.


But if you notify the 2nd entry in the queue, that can only mean that the state 
of the this entry has changed from 'queued' to 'ready-for-CC', otherwise there 
would be no notification. And that change of the state of the 2nd can only have 
resulted from a change of the state of the top entry, which must have changed 
from 'queued' to 'suspended' somehow. The only event what could have changed 
the state is the receiving of the unsubscribe, which means that there is some 
kind of RPC combined with the unsubsribe.

This was approximately the argumentation of some colleagues when we discussed 
this some time ago, when our proposal also was to simply un-subscribe and 
re-subscribe for sus/res. And that's why we came up with a proposal for the 
explicit sus/res procedures now.



BR, Martin



_______________________________________________
BLISS mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/bliss

Reply via email to