Article View: alc.test
Article #11934Re: CMISE m-get-response: multiple or single?
From: Ulrich Raabe
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 09:20
Date: Tue, 22 Nov 1994 09:20
52 lines
3033 bytes
3033 bytes
In article <3aqio3$1ho@nlsw23.ats.nld.alcatel.nl>, ouweland@nlsw23.ats.nld.alcatel.nl (Charles van den Ouweland) writes: |> |>My question is: when to use the single procedure and when the |>multiple? |> |>Of course the multiple procedure must be used if there is more than |>one |>MO. But if there is exactly one MO, both procedures are suitable. |>Is |>there a rule which defines what to do in this case? One could |>imagine |>a rule saying: "If there is exactly one MO selected by scoping and |>filtering, the single procedure shall be used". Or there could be a |>rule: "If scope=base object only, the single procedure shall be |>used, |>and otherwise the multiple procedure". But I haven't found such a |>rule |>yet. I've used a database which used the single procedure and another one which used the multiple procedure, when just one MOC was found. So, you have to look in the desciption of the CMISE user how he/she/it will handle the situation - or try it. I can't say the following is generally true, but I assume that one policy for those situation is: if you ask for a single MOC then the single procecure is used. In case you don't know the number of returned MOCs when sending the m-get-request (e.g. when using filtering) the multiple procedure is used. The latter makes it easier for the algorithm used for creating m-get-response. Sorry for this weak answer, but these are my experiences. -- , , Servus Uli ( ) ( ) | | | | "Press any key to continue - or any other key to quit" | | | | | |.| | | / \ | +----------------------------------------------------------|_|_|_|--+ | Ulrich Raabe ,,,,, Email : Ulrich.Raabe@zfe.siemens.de | | Siemens AG . . XNS : ure:49/89/636/18:mch p siemens ag | | ZFE T SN 2 @ | @ Phone : + 49 89 636 48 308 | | D-81730 Munich \_/ Fax : + 49 89 636 48 000 | +-------------------------------------------------------------------+
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<3asd45$6ct@ztivax.zfe.siemens.de>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uunet!EU.net!Germany.EU.net!Munich.Germany.EU.net!zfe.siemens.de!genf!raabeReferences:
<3aqio3$1ho@nlsw23.ats.nld.alcatel.nl>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 115d32,35fb71ceb0b58076 X-Google-Attributes: gid115d32,public X-Google-Thread: 10fc9c,35fb71ceb0b58076 X-Google-Attributes: gid10fc9c,public X-Google-Thread: 10f2ac,35fb71ceb0b58076 X-Google-Attributes: gid10f2ac,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 1994-11-22 01:57:07 PST Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!nntp.gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uunet!EU.net!Germany.EU.net!Munich.Germany.EU.net!zfe.siemens.de!genf!raabe From: raabe@genf.zfe.siemens.de (Ulrich Raabe) Newsgroups: alc.test,comp.dcom.net-management,comp.protocols.iso Subject: Re: CMISE m-get-response: multiple or single? Date: 22 Nov 1994 09:20:05 GMT Organization: Siemens AG, Munich Lines: 52 Sender: raabe@genf (Ulrich Raabe) Distribution: world Message-ID: <3asd45$6ct@ztivax.zfe.siemens.de> References: <3aqio3$1ho@nlsw23.ats.nld.alcatel.nl> Reply-To: Ulrich.Raabe@zfe.siemens.de NNTP-Posting-Host: genf.zfe.siemens.de X-Newsreader: mxrn 6.18-20