Re: [ebxml-msg] Issue for your review

[Dave Elliot <david.elliot@xmlglobal.com>]

Hi Mike,

On Mon, 2002-10-21 at 15:32, Michael Wang wrote:
> Hi Dave,
> 
> I think you have misunderstood me.  As suggested by you that MSH
> should not care of transport level state then this is a possible scenario.
> 
> The receiving MSH forwards the message to its application using HTTP.
> The receiving MSH not caring of the transport state then sends
> the MSH Ack back to the sender.  The sending MSH received its expected
> MSH ack.

Oh, I've only been talking about MSH <-> MSH communications covered by
the ebXML Messaging spec.  Whatever method an MSH implementation uses to
communicate with its application clients is a totally different story. 
That would be the Message Service Interface (MSI) which currently isn't
spec'd as far as I know.  So those issues are all implementation/vendor
specific.

In ebXML terms if the Receiving MSH returns an Ack to the Sending MSH
then it has taken responsibility for the message.  If the vendor who
implemented the Receiving MSH used HTTP to implement their MSI then
maybe they would have to get involved at a transport protocol level to
make sure its responsibilities were met.

Note it is _not_ the Sending MSHs responsibility to deliver the ebXML
message to the remote party itself, but rather to the MSH that
represents that remote party.

Cheers,

Dave Elliot
XML Global Technologies