RE: [ebxml-cppa] Re: CPA between IM's?

[Dale Moberg <dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com>]

Resending because of email problems with
cppa list. Dale Moberg.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dale Moberg 
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 11:26 AM
To: Martin W Sachs; Dan Weinreb
Cc: ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [ebxml-cppa] Re: CPA between IM's?


Dan and Marty,

In Palo Alto, at the second face to face, I believe
that what we decided is: that CPPA did not want
to produce distinct formats, or distinct processing cases,
for CPAs governing To and From agreements and for
CPAS governing Party and IM agreements, at the 1.1 alignment
level. We then reported on this to Messaging. Messaging
responded with their current changes that have shaped some
features of the 1.1 version (Via gone, SynchReply as a SOAP
module, etc, etc).

Some of us would like to see future 
discussion about assimilating
IMs to parts of a BP. Then the PartyIds
could be for the originating/receiving Party 
and the IM as a full participant
in the BP. In that case, there would only typically
be two CPAs for the IM case: 
the agreement for From and IM,
and the agreement for IM and To.
(A third CPA would be used
for any BP actions/signals 
that involved
direct transport between
From and To or vice versa.)

If IMs are only SOAP IMs, then 
we await the XMLP clarification
of SOAP IM, and we will follow 
that. We hope that for the 
SOAP IM case, the SOAP IM is not 
part of the BP. In that case,
no CPA is to be defined except 
for Source MSH and Sink MSH.
(the From and To Parties.) 
We do not know how SOAP IMs will
handle their configuration. 
But the URL Transport/Endpoint
for this case, would be those URLs of the IM, and 
they would be contained within the CPA between
From Party and To Party. 
If SOAP IM configuration issues are
decided to be in scope 
(no decision yet on that from CPPA TC
members or anyone else, for that matter), 
then we would take up 
the requirements at the 2.0
level. 

That is where I think we stand after Palo Alto.
However, it remains possible that the 
"three" CPA approach will be revived
for the IM case ( CPAs for From and To,
From and IM, and IM and To).

If so, we would have to go back 
and explain special processing
techniques for this case, special 
rules for CPA signature
checking, special rules for 
obtaining To and From values
for this case, and so on. 
Or else the IM CPAs will in
effect be XML Transforms
over the original CPA,
replacing selected values
as needed. Again all this
is purely speculative about
what  _could_ be done for
this situation. But the requirements
need to be a lot clearer for what we
have to support with respect to IMs.


  

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin W Sachs [mailto:mwsachs@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2001 7:29 AM
To: Dan Weinreb
Cc: ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [ebxml-cppa] Re: CPA between IM's?



Dan,

I believe that the CPPA team agreed to support in V 1.1 whatever
intermediary function is specified in the MSG spec for V 1.1.  I have
copied the CPPA listserver on this reply.  I assume that the right
people
will see it.

Regards,
Marty

************************************************************************
*************

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
************************************************************************
*************



Dan Weinreb <dlw@exceloncorp.com> on 12/05/2001 01:05:58 AM

Please respond to "Dan Weinreb" <dlw@exceloncorp.com>

To:    Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
cc:
Subject:    CPA between IM's?



Marty, has the CPPA group addressed the question of whether, in a
multi-hop communication (i.e. with IM's), there is a CPA between the
successive IM's?

Within the MS group discussions, the impression I have gotten is that
the CPA is only for describing the agreement beween the endpoints (the
From and To), and any pre-agreements that IM's participate in are out
of scope of the CPPA spec.  Has the CPPA group made a decision about
this?

Thanks!

-- Dan





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