User Inputs Requested 10/4/2004: Use of Notification of Failure

["Monica J. Martin" <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>]

In ebBP, we'd had more discussions on the relevance and use of 
Notification of Failure. Reviewed the RNIF asynchronous messaging. We've 
also discussed what differences may apply because BPSS allows Acceptance 
Acknowledgment signals.  We are also trying to enable the business 
process, realizing there may be limitations between front- and backend 
systems.  If you review RosettaNet, we see the use of NOF in these cases:

    * If a response business document cannot be processed by the
      Requesting Party after an Receipt Acknowledgment is sent: Note
      that RosettaNet does not use the Acceptance Acknowledgment.
    * If a timeout occurs and no/no more retries are available.
    * If a timeout occurs waiting for response. Note that RosettaNet
      does not use Acceptance Acknowledgment.

We recognize several criteria and business requirements feed into 
providing a well-defined NOF capability and its impact on retries. It 
has been recommended we separate a logical path forward between v2.0 and 
a subsequent v3.0.  For v2.0, we have discussed:

    * Allowing the definition of an NOF via extension of the defined BT
      patterns. v2.0 allows the extension of a BT pattern. Provide an
      example in the specification (action David Webber with team review).
    * Retain the business retry count for backward compatibility and
      understanding (although technically it is redundant).
    * Allow use of a variable to allow specification of the retry count
      (action David Webber with team review).

Understandably there are several open questions because the previous 
guidance talks about failed business control (on either requester or 
responder), transaction exit by a responder, and timeout with NOF by 
requester (More work is required as revocation of offer is indicated in 
UMM R10. This requires more definition than is currently evident in R10. 
Other efforts like UBAC may provide guidance in the future). We'd like 
to review the overall issue with you to determine if this phased plan is 
in line with your needs. Several open questions exist that perhaps you 
as user communities can provide experience on:

    * Could NOF be precluded under some circumstances where an AA is
      required (most often the case)?
    * If an NOF is a separate BT pattern in the future, preconditions
      may be required for its use. This may dictate significant
      constraint on the collaboration and the implementation. Are the
      tradeoffs understood and acceptable?
    * Would a simple notification request to a partner be sufficient to,
      at times, circumvent an unnecessary NOF? (Tell calls this a gentle
      reminder).
    * If a retry occurs and the response occurs (cross one another), how
      do we achieve a consistent state?

I realize these may filter into new functions in a later version, but 
your feedback is crucial to our understanding the scope of this work. We 
encourage you to attend Friday's call at 9 a.m. PDT, 8 October 2004.

    866 882 3998
    International 865 525 0769
    Passcode 9081038

Here are some summaries that explain some of the UMM guidelines, inputs 
from various communities include yours, and historical discussions about 
how to manage the use of NOF. If you are not an OASIS member, each of 
these references can be found in the email archives for ebBP and are 
publicly available (reference below):
a. Summary 10/4/2004 (Martin): 
http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200410/msg00002.html
b. Meeting notes, see Kavi Documents under Meeting Notes for 9/27/2004 
and 10/4/2004:
    9/27: http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200410/msg00000.html
    10/4: http://www.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200410/msg00006.html
c. Working session on general exceptions and NOF 9/10/2004:
    Agenda and details: 
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200409/msg00065.html
    Session notes: 
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200409/msg00057.html

Open archives for September and October are found at: 
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/.