Propose Embargo Behavior

The Propose Embargo Behavior Tree is shown in the figure below.

---
title: Propose Embargo Behavior Tree
---
flowchart LR
    seq["→"]
    cs_pxa(["CS in ...pxa?"])
    seq -->|A| cs_pxa
    fb1[?]
    seq -->|B| fb1
    cs_d(["CS ..d...?"])
    fb1 --> cs_d
    other(["other reason"])
    fb1 --> other
    select["select terms"]
    seq -->|C| select
    fb2[?]
    seq -->|D| fb2
    pr_seq["→"]
    fb2 -->|D1| pr_seq
    em_p_or_r(["EM P or R?"])
    pr_seq --> em_p_or_r
    no_new_prop(["no new proposal?"])
    pr_seq --> no_new_prop
    np_seq["→"]
    fb2 -->|D2| np_seq
    em_n_or_p(["EM N or P?"])
    np_seq --> em_n_or_p
    em_to_p["EM &rarr; P<br/>(emit EP)"]
    np_seq --> em_to_p
    ar_seq["&rarr;"]
    fb2 -->|D3| ar_seq
    em_a_or_r(["EM A or R?"])
    ar_seq --> em_a_or_r
    em_to_r["EM &rarr; R<br/>(emit EV)"]
    ar_seq --> em_to_r

See also

• Negotiate Embargoes
• Default Embargoes

It consists of a sequence that begins with (A,B) a check for embargo viability as outlined in Negotiating Embargoes.

Once the checks succeed, it proceeds to (C) selecting embargo terms to propose. Implementations of this task might simply draw from a default policy, as in Default Embargoes, or it might be a case-specific decision made by a Participant.

(D) Embargo terms can be proposed from any of the non-eXited states (\(q^{em} \in \{N,P,A,R\}\)).

(D1) If a new or revised embargo has already been proposed (\(q^{em} \in \{P,R\}\), the tree then checks whether a counterproposal is desired. Assuming it is not, no proposal is made, and the behavior succeeds.

Otherwise, (D2) proposals from state \(q^{em} \in N\) emit \(EP\) and transition \(q^{em} \xrightarrow{p} P\), whereas (D3) those from \(q^{em} \in A\) emit \(EV\) and move to \(q^{em} \xrightarrow{p} R\).

Proposals from states \(q^{em} \in P\) (D2) or \(q^{em} \in R\) (D3) represent counterproposals and, therefore, do not change the EM state. They do, however, emit \(EP\) or \(EV\) messages as appropriate.