RE: FW: T2,Proposed solution for ... Re: SyncReplyandReliableMessagingMethod inQualityOfServiceInfo

[Martin W Sachs <mwsachs@us.ibm.com>]

We tried to make it pretty clear that a delivery channel can be specified
separately for each and every business transaction if necessary.  We also
made it clear that there is no way in any of these specifications to
specify a separate delivery channel for each instance of a message.  One
exception, it is permissible for a request message to specify the endpoint
address to be used for the response and that would override whatever
endpoint address the CPA defines for that business transaction.

*************************************************************************************

Martin W. Sachs
IBM T. J. Watson Research Center
P. O. B. 704
Yorktown Hts, NY 10598
914-784-7287;  IBM tie line 863-7287
Notes address:  Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM
Internet address:  mwsachs @ us.ibm.com
*************************************************************************************



David Fischer <david@drummondgroup.com> on 09/21/2001 07:14:14 PM

To:   Dale Moberg <dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com>, Dan Weinreb
      <dlw@exceloncorp.com>
cc:   Chris.Ferris@sun.com, ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject:  RE: FW: T2, Proposed solution for ... Re:
      SyncReplyandReliableMessagingMethod in QualityOfServiceInfo



Dale,

OK.  This is encouraging . . .  The reason this question came up before is
there
is no way to specify which DeliveryChannel within the CPA to use?  We need
to
transmit this information from the From Party to the To Party.  How?  Do we
need
to add a DeliveryChannel attribute onto the CPAId?  Is there some other
way?

Regards,

David Fischer
Drummond Group

-----Original Message-----
From: Dale Moberg [mailto:dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com]
Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 5:19 PM
To: Dan Weinreb; david@drummondgroup.com
Cc: Chris.Ferris@sun.com; ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: FW: T2, Proposed solution for ... Re:
SyncReplyandReliableMessagingMethod in QualityOfServiceInfo





David F>>   Does this mean communications between two Trading Partners
is ALWAYS RM or NEVER
   RM?  We've already decided DeliveryChannel is address specific so
there cannot
   be two DeliveryChannels between one set of addresses.

Dan W>>Sorry if I missed something in the earlier mail (I just searched
through the back-mail and couldn't find this), but why can't this
work?  The CPA seems very specifically designed for allowing different
Services, and different Actions within Services, to each select a
different DeliveryChannel.

I agree with Dan that a CPA
and the MSHes that can operate in
accordance with  those
agreements must be able to be
configured so that, if agreed,
entirely different delivery channels
can be used for different
actions.

Incidentally, I do not understand
what is being said about delivery
channels being "address specific."

The same Transport
element (with the same endpoint URI)
can be part of different Delivery
Channels if combined with
different DocExchange ids, or,
if the same endpoints are put
with different Transports, then
DeliveryChannels may
differ because of some other aspect
(such as transport security).
(I interpreted "address specific"
as having to do with endpoint URLs.)
And any of these DocExchanges may
be independently associated with
BP actions.

Thanks Dan for correcting this.


----------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>