Legacy Issue Number: 2457
Summary: There is currently a heated discussion in comp.object.corba about
interoperability (Subject: Naming Service Interoperability).
In a nutshell, the argument is about whether, if I send an object reference
created by ORB A as a parameter to ORB B, whether or not ORB B is
a) obliged to accept that reference as a valid parameter
b) obliged to return me the same reference I sent (in the sense
that the reference is functionally equivalent) when it returns
that reference as a parameter to me
c) obliged to preserve the contents of the reference if it goes
though a cycle of object_to_string/string_to_object in ORB B.
Now, my argument in this thread is that if an ORB doesn"t behave in line
with the above three points, interoperability is completely lost because
I could never be guaranteed that I can, for example, expect to be able
to store an IOR in a Naming Service and have that work.
Reported: CORBA 2.2 — Fri, 19 Feb 1999 05:00 GMT
Disposition: Resolved — CPP 1.1
issue split into issues 3234 and 3235
Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:58 GMT