RE: [legalxml-courtfiling] RE: [Norton AntiSpam] [legalxml-courtfiling] Please review 'Proposed Service Models for ECF3'

[Shane.Durham@lexisnexis.com]

Title: Please review 'Proposed Service Models for ECF3'

>> The complexity of managing the many-to-many communications model is significantly more difficult than the many to one and would require that the update of the users also include the update of all the Filing Assembly MDEs which I anticipate after the standard begins will increase to hundreds per court. <<

 

If each attorney has, what is essentially a stand-alone FilingApplication (with built-in serviceMDE functions), that must be recognized as individual MDEs, then, the 'hub' approach is certainly advantageous.

 

I agree that if the system were to include hundreds of serviceMDEs, then a 'service hub' should be implemented (hosted by the court, or otherwise).

 

** But, that's not what we are debating here. **

There is a fine point in this discussion that is occasionally get muddled.

 

Some are thinking that we must support two technical models, because we have identified two possible implementations:

 

The 'hub' variation of implementation does not demand two technical models.

 

    Using Model B: The court MUST be the hub/router.

    Using Model A: The court can CHOOSE to be the hub/router or not.

 

 

Model A: without hub

This is the model with which we are generally familiar.

 

The court acts as a host for the service-list and service messages are exchanged between FilingAssembly applications and the serviceMDEs participating in the system.

 

Model A: with hub(s)

As host of the service-list, the court can indicate to FilingAssembly applications that it will be assigning the court-managed/hosted serviceMDE 'address' for all service-list members.  In effect, the court is 'hard-coding' the service addresses, so that it can force itself (or some delegate) to be 'the hub'.

 

With that rule established, the 'hub' can, in turn, choose:

 

(1) to perform the service functions directly with the intended users.

This is not something they appear to want to do, but some might.

 

OR

 

(2) pass the service calls to the respective users' true serviceMDEs,

 

 

How's that sound?

- Shane Durham

LexisNexis