Browse Prior Art Database

Deferred Compatibility Decision

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000109538D
Original Publication Date: 1992-Sep-01
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2005-Mar-24
Document File: 2 page(s) / 98K

Publishing Venue

IBM

Related People

Furtney, DA: AUTHOR

Abstract

An earlier peer to peer method of determining compatibility of components in a system indicated that components were compatible unless it found that they were not. However, compatibility cannot always be ascertained, and it incorrectly signalled compatibility in these circumstances. The earlier method assumed that the compatibility of two interacting components could be deferred to the newest of the two and that it would have knowledge of its compatibility with the other. If neither of two interacting components could affirm or deny compatibility with the other, compatibility could not be discerned. This could occur when a component was built without current knowledge of its compatibility with an interacting component built earlier (e.g., when components were developed by different groups at the same time.)

This text was extracted from an ASCII text file.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 54% of the total text.

Deferred Compatibility Decision

       An earlier peer to peer method of determining
compatibility of components in a system indicated that components
were compatible unless it found that they were not.  However,
compatibility cannot always be ascertained, and it incorrectly
signalled compatibility in these circumstances.  The earlier method
assumed that the compatibility of two interacting components could be
deferred to the newest of the two and that it would have knowledge of
its compatibility with the other.  If neither of two interacting
components could affirm or deny compatibility with the other,
compatibility could not be discerned.  This could occur when a
component was built without current knowledge of its compatibility
with an interacting component built earlier (e.g., when components
were developed by different groups at the same time.)

      The addition of a "don't know" signal permits the compatibility
check user to take special action when compatibility is neither
confirmed nor denied.  It is crucial that the participants in the
compatibility protocol know the limits of their knowledge.  They must
not provide an indication of compatibility for objects they do have
know ledge of when built.  This could be implemented by simply
recording a compatibility knowledge limit for each interacting
component.  This limit is the highest level of the other component
known to the component at the time it was created.  Thus, each
component, when checkin...