RE: [ebxml-cppa] CPPA teleconference minutes: October 18, 2001

[David Fischer <david@drummondgroup.com>]

Sorry I missed the meeting, it didn't make it onto my calendar.

 

Comments:

 

If end-to-end, signed Acknowledgment is requested, it provides NRR -- in the same way DeliveryReceipt does.  NRR cannot be provided at the BPSS/Application level since MSH does not pass the entire message and thus the Application cannot generate the required Digest(s). 

 

Since the MSH does not do any application parsing, any Business Level receipts cannot be done at the MSH level.  While the Application cannot do NRR, it can/must provide anything along the lines of "Message verified/being processed" (i.e. Delivery Receipt).  The Application would pass this signal to the MSH with a flag which says "sign this".  While it would not be illegal for the Application to send a signed/encrypted payload to the MSH (would this be S/MIME?), it is not within our model to do so.

 

An Acknowledgment can be requested separately from Reliable Messaging although the only difference is duplicateElimination.

 

I thing/agree that MSH signals should be returned synchronously for HTTP.  This should be the default.  Maybe we don't need a flag, just make this a requirement (Why would this ever be done asynchronously for HTTP?)  I think I agree with Dale.  This should match the transport method (sync for HTTP, async for SMTP) and should not change per message.

 

Regards,

 

David Fischer

Drummond Group.

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Weida [mailto:rweida@hotmail.com]
Sent: Saturday, October 20, 2001 5:05 PM
To: CPPA
Subject: [ebxml-cppa] CPPA teleconference minutes: October 18, 2001

Draft minutes of the October 18 teleconference are attached.  Please send me any additions or corrections.

 

Cheers,

Tony Weida

Independent CPPA Fan :-)