如果您无法自由地向机器 X 和 Y 发出“您有P”请求，我有一种感觉，该任务可能像经典的 两军问题。如果是这样，那么您必须做设计师面临不可能的约束时所做的事情，或者提供令人满意的解决方案（例如 TCP 4,3 次握手）在足够的时间内有效，或者如果“足够好”还不够好，那么您必须向管理层表明，他们实际上是在问不可能的事情。
我知道你说过不要问，但是为什么像约束（5）那样禁止幂等传输呢？
It looks like condition (5) is the toughy and would be mitigated somewhat if A and B can query the state of X and Y which you don't specify.
This reminds me of the NNTP Ihave/Sendme protocol which may be of some use.
If you are not freely able to make "do you have P" requests of machines X and Y, I've got a feeling that the task may be provably impossible like the classic Two Army Problem. If this is so, then you have to do what designers faced with impossible constraints do and either provide a satisficing solution (e.g. TCP 4,3-way handshake) which works enough of the time or if "good enough" isn't good enough then you have to show management that they have literally asked the impossible.
I know you said not to ask, but why would idempotent transfers be prohibited as in constraint (5)?
发布评论
评论（1）
看起来条件 (5) 很困难，如果 A 和 B 可以查询您未指定的 X 和 Y 的状态，情况会有所缓解。
这让我想起了 NNTP Ihave/Sendme 协议，该协议可能是一些用处。
如果您无法自由地向机器 X 和 Y 发出“您有P”请求，我有一种感觉，该任务可能像经典的 两军问题。如果是这样，那么您必须做设计师面临不可能的约束时所做的事情，或者提供令人满意的解决方案（例如 TCP 4,3 次握手）在足够的时间内有效，或者如果“足够好”还不够好，那么您必须向管理层表明，他们实际上是在问不可能的事情。
我知道你说过不要问，但是为什么像约束（5）那样禁止幂等传输呢？
It looks like condition (5) is the toughy and would be mitigated somewhat if A and B can query the state of X and Y which you don't specify.
This reminds me of the NNTP Ihave/Sendme protocol which may be of some use.
If you are not freely able to make "do you have P" requests of machines X and Y, I've got a feeling that the task may be provably impossible like the classic Two Army Problem. If this is so, then you have to do what designers faced with impossible constraints do and either provide a satisficing solution (e.g. TCP 4,3-way handshake) which works enough of the time or if "good enough" isn't good enough then you have to show management that they have literally asked the impossible.
I know you said not to ask, but why would idempotent transfers be prohibited as in constraint (5)?