Re: [ebxml-msg] Minutes 12/03/01 - Voting Meeting

[Arvola Chan <arvola@tibco.com>]

David:

What if the CPA says ackRequested is "perMessage" and actor is "nextMSH"? In
this case, the sender desires an intermediate Ack rather than an end-to-end
Ack. An AckRequested targeted to the next intermediary must be included in
the message because the intermediary is not privy to information in the CPA.

I don't think we want to make the AckRequested required or prohibited
depending on the setting of the actor attribute. Instead, it is simpler to
require that each of the properties that have "per message semantics" be
present in the SOAP Heaer in order to get the desired effect.

Regards,
-Arvola

-----Original Message-----
From: David Fischer <david@drummondgroup.com>
To: Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@sun.com>
Cc: Martin W Sachs <mwsachs@us.ibm.com>; Arvola Chan <arvola@tibco.com>;
ebXML Msg <ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 11:44 AM
Subject: RE: [ebxml-msg] Minutes 12/03/01 - Voting Meeting


Yes Chris, that's exactly what I said before.  The absence of AckRequested
implies *false*.

IMO, AckRequested should only appear IF CPA says *perMessage*.  Otherwise,
AckRequested should not appear at all -- use the CPA.

David.

-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Ferris [mailto:chris.ferris@sun.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 10:58 AM
To: David Fischer
Cc: Martin W Sachs; Arvola Chan; ebXML Msg
Subject: Re: [ebxml-msg] Minutes 12/03/01 - Voting Meeting


It must ALWAYS be present when you WANT an acknowledgment.
Its absense implies that you don't want one.

Cheers,

Chris

David Fischer wrote:

> Marty, if AckRequested must always appear, then how do I send a message
which
> DOES NOT request an Acknowledgment?
>
> David.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin W Sachs [mailto:mwsachs@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 7:50 AM
> To: David Fischer
> Cc: Arvola Chan; ebXML Msg
> Subject: RE: [ebxml-msg] Minutes 12/03/01 - Voting Meeting
>
>
>
> Some comments below, MWS:
>
>
****************************************************************************
****
> *****
>
> 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 12/03/2001 09:43:28 PM
>
> To:    Arvola Chan <arvola@tibco.com>, ebXML Msg
>        <ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org>
> cc:
> Subject:    RE: [ebxml-msg] Minutes 12/03/01 - Voting Meeting
>
>
>
> Arvola,
>
> If AckRequested is *true* in the CPA, then does the AckRequested element
> have to
> appear?  If it MUST appear, then why have it in the CPA?  I think the
> Receiving
> MSH must send an Acknowledgment in this case even if AckRequested does not
> appear.  Actually, I would prefer that AckRequested MUST NOT appear if the
> CPA
> says *true* or *false*.
>
> MWS:  I agree with the last statement.
>
> If AckRequested is *perMessage* in the CPA, then what happens if the
> AckRequested element does not appear?  The spec says this means no
> Acknowledgment.  The default then is *false* if the CPA says *perMessage*.
>
> MWS: This is a programming error.  The MSH should do nothing except
forward
> an error indication upward to the middleware/software layer that cares
> about it.
>
> I think we should not have multiple rules about *perMessage*.  If a
default
> is
> provided in one case, then it should work the same in all cases.  Since
the
> absence of an Acknowledgment element means *false* then the absence of
> duplicateElimination should also mean *false* and the absence of a signed
> attribute should mean *false* (or in all cases it means take the default).
>
> MWS:  The MSH SHALL not guess.  There are valid defaults, such as
> specifying
> the value of Ackrequested in the CPA and omitting the element from the
> message.
> Defaults must not be used to paper over software errors.  That can cause
> untold
> harm at both ends.
>
> David.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arvola Chan [mailto:arvola@tibco.com]
> Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 5:05 PM
> To: David Fischer; ebXML Msg
> Subject: Re: [ebxml-msg] Minutes 12/03/01 - Voting Meeting
>
>
> David:
>
> I don't agree with the last sentence in the following paragraph within
your
> meeting minutes:
>
>
>>PerMessage parameters:  Colleen, what parameters have been identified.
>>
> Arvola:  >duplicateElimination, AckRequested, AckRequested/signed.  Dale:
> perMessage in >CPA means no agreement.  Colleen: what about defaults.
> Dale:
> OK.  Ian:  add to >document, if there is a conflict then generate error /
> define error ? <<next item>>.  >Consensus is that perMessage does not
> require item to appear, there may be an >MSH default.
>
> I have been assuming that the AckRequested element must be present in a
> message before the receiver will return an Acknowledgment. The Message
> Service Interface may have a default to allow the application above to
omit
> the specification of whether an Acknowledgment is desired. The sending MSH
> must include an AckRequested element in a message if it expects to receipt
> an Acknowledgment for it.
>
> Similarly, the sending MSH must specify an appropriate value for the
> duplicateElimination attribute in the QualityOfServiceInfo element, one
> that
> does not conflict with the specification within the CPA.
>
> Regards,
> -Arvola
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Fischer <david@drummondgroup.com>
> To: ebXML Msg <ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Date: Monday, December 03, 2001 12:51 PM
> Subject: [ebxml-msg] Minutes 12/03/01 - Voting Meeting
>
>
> These are the minutes from Monday's voting meeting.
>
> I thought we achieved consensus on the error code issue concerning
> NotSupported/Inconsistent but talking to some members afterwards, this is
> not
> clear.
>
> Does anyone object to changing the error code on Ping, Pong,
MessageStatus,
> duplicateElimination and AckRequested to Inconsistent?  This means the
only
> thing in the spec with NotSupported is MessageOrder.
>
> Regards,
>
> David Fischer
> Drummond Group
> ebXML-MS Editor.
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>



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


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