ebBP 2/3/2005: Reliability - Messaging and ebBP

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

In our discussion Tuesday, we decided to add more descriptive text and 
additional information in the BT patterns matrices on relationship 
between reliable messaging and process definition. We also discussed 
signatures. I've added details to the matrices, and published those on 
Wednesday. See:

    http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebxml-bp/email/archives/200502/msg00008.html
    http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebxml-bp/email/archives/200502/msg00007.html

Proposed text changes (to wd 06):

4.2 Signals
No change is proposed because the details on signals and state alignment 
are found in later sub-sections in Section 4.

4.6.6.3
………………….The /isGuaranteedMessageDeliveryRequired/ refers to the 
underlying messaging service......[full paragraph]

[next paragraph] Note that we can only guarantee the successful 
synchronization of state between two parties if reliable messaging is 
used and if the business transaction is defined to use the request and 
response acceptance acknowledgement signals, which guarantee that the 
corresponding business documents were processed by the respective 
applications.....

[ADD] Criteria surrounding the use of the business transaction patterns 
may include reliable messaging and use of the 
isGuaranteedMessageDelivery requirement (See Section 4.6.6.1). [end-ADD] 
In preceding technical specification versions, .…………………………

4.6.6.7
(before last paragraph in 06 draft)
The parties may establish the parameters for reliability and intent, and 
its relationship to assurance or non-repudiation, for example. 
Agreements and enforceability may be relevant to establishing these 
capabilities. How these parameters translate to implementation decisions 
is unspecified. For example, using a receipt signature with digest, 
using and persisting digital signatures with ebMS, or other 
implementation options are not specified.