[comp.protocols.iso] ISO RPC DP

ald1@pyuxe.UUCP (Alan L Dickman) (01/21/89)

Can anyone tell me the status of of ISO DP 10154 (?)
which is the draft proposal for a Remote Procedure
Call mechanism.  Was it adopted?

If you can recommend articles that describe the contents
and/or status of the proposal, please send mail.

Thanks in advance!

<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  ...rutgers!bellcore!ald1  <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>
<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  Alan Dickman, 201-699-4381  <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>
<>>>>>>>  Raritan River Software Center,  RRC 1M-220  <<<<<<<<<>
<>>>>>  Bellcore, 444 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, N.J.  08854  <<<<<>

khiem@hpindda.HP.COM (Khiem Ho) (01/24/89)

/ hpindda:comp.protocols.iso / ald1@pyuxe.UUCP (Alan L Dickman) /  8:25 am  Jan 20, 1989 /
Can anyone tell me the status of of ISO DP 10154 (?)
which is the draft proposal for a Remote Procedure
Call mechanism.  Was it adopted?

If you can recommend articles that describe the contents
and/or status of the proposal, please send mail.

Thanks in advance!

<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  ...rutgers!bellcore!ald1  <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>
<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>  Alan Dickman, 201-699-4381  <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>
<>>>>>>>  Raritan River Software Center,  RRC 1M-220  <<<<<<<<<>
<>>>>>  Bellcore, 444 Hoes Lane, Piscataway, N.J.  08854  <<<<<>
----------

The current standards on ROSE are:
   CCITT X.219 and X.229
   ISO   9072-1 and 9072-2

I know for sure CCITT already approved them last Oct.
I don't know the results of ISO ballots (six month). 
And the two have (almost) identical text.

Khiem Ho
Hewlett-Packard 

kmont@hpindda.HP.COM (Kevin Montgomery) (01/25/89)

/ hpindda:comp.protocols.iso / ald1@pyuxe.UUCP (Alan L Dickman) /  8:25 am  Jan 20, 1989 /
> Can anyone tell me the status of of ISO DP 10154 (?)
> which is the draft proposal for a Remote Procedure
> Call mechanism.  Was it adopted?

If you're talking about the fasttrack ECMA -> ISO proposal,
I'd guess (note disclaimer), that the US voted no and Britain
voted yes (probably with comments).  How's that for an insightful 
piece of information?  (I'd guess that means that overall the
vote probably floundered along the 'no' lines)...

					kevin (speculating for himself only)

joey@geaclib.UUCP (Joey De Wiele) (01/27/89)

In article <5560012@hpindda.HP.COM>, khiem@hpindda.HP.COM (Khiem Ho) writes:
>> / hpindda:comp.protocols.iso / ald1@pyuxe.UUCP (Alan L Dickman) /  8:25 am  Jan 20, 1989 /
>> Can anyone tell me the status of of ISO DP 10154 (?)
>> which is the draft proposal for a Remote Procedure
>> Call mechanism.  Was it adopted?
> 
> The current standards on ROSE are:
>    CCITT X.219 and X.229
>    ISO   9072-1 and 9072-2
> 
> I know for sure CCITT already approved them last Oct.
> I don't know the results of ISO ballots (six month). 
> And the two have (almost) identical text.
> 
> Khiem Ho
> Hewlett-Packard 

Someone at ISO is doing work on a specific Remote Procedure Call
standard. This standard is NOT the ROSE standards referenced by Mr. HO.

I believe the work is being driven by ECMA, but I am not sure. I know
nothing of the standards beyond vague comments I heard at the SC 21
plenaryin Sydney. It sounds like RPC is similar in concept to ROSE, but
I can't say for sure.

ISO wouldn't be ISO unless work was replicated in different groups.

Joey

pauld@tcom.stc.co.uk (Paul Davies) (02/03/89)

In article <3606@geaclib.UUCP> joey@geaclib.UUCP (Joey De Wiele) writes:
>
>Someone at ISO is doing work on a specific Remote Procedure Call
>standard. This standard is NOT the ROSE standards referenced by Mr. HO.
>
>I believe the work is being driven by ECMA, but I am not sure. I know
>nothing of the standards beyond vague comments I heard at the SC 21
>plenaryin Sydney. It sounds like RPC is similar in concept to ROSE, but
>I can't say for sure.
>
>ISO wouldn't be ISO unless work was replicated in different groups.
>
>Joey

ECMA are (were ?) doing work specifically on RPC using OSI Remote Operations.

There is a separate spec to the X.219/229 (X.410 ?), it is titled :
 
		'STANDARD ECMA-127,
		     RPC

	    BASIC REMOTE PROCEDURE CALL 
	    USING OSI REMOTE OPERATIONS'

The spec I have is dated December 1987,I don't know what its status is within
ISO but was told it would make DIS shortly and expected to make full IS
within a year. But I've no idea how reliable that info is,for all I know it may already be DIS.

You can receive a free copy of ECMA-127 by writing to :

European Computer Manufacturers Association
114 Ru du Rhone - 1204 Geneva,Switzerland.

If ISO have taken it on board,their version may be more up to date than
the ECMA spec.

I believe the ECMA RPC to be a proper subset of the Remote Operations (ISO
9072/1 and ISO 9072/2). It seems that the ECMA RPC has taken account of
restrictions placed on application programmers by a lot of programming
languages and so much of the 'baggage/richness' provided by the full Remote
Operations is not included. For example, ECMA RPC is generally
restricted to Remote Operations Operation Class 1,which I think means it
only supports synchronous working (invoke and wait on result).

To me it is easier reading than the ROS specs, there is even an RPC
tutorial and guide for application protocol designers.

Some extracts from the spec :

'The subject of this ECMA Standard is Remote Procedure Call (RPC) for open
distributed processing, using the ISO 9072/1 and ISO 9072/2 Remote
Operations notation, services and protocols. These OSI standards are used
without change'.

'This ECMA Standard includes........that subset of Remote Operations which
is consistent with programming language procedure call semantics'.

Hope this helps

	Paul