RE: [ebxml-cppa] Re: [ebxml-dev] MSH 1.0 vs 2.0?

[Engkee Kwang <ekwang@vitria.com>]

i thought that's what the tp:version attribute of the
ebXMLSenderBinding/ebXMLReceiverBinding is for

is it not?

-engkee


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Martin W Sachs [mailto:mwsachs@us.ibm.com]
> Sent: Thursday, May 16, 2002 3:27 PM
> To: ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [ebxml-cppa] Re: [ebxml-dev] MSH 1.0 vs 2.0?
> 
> 
> 
> The appended correspondence is part of a discussion on the 
> dev list about
> interoperability (or lack thereof) between MSH v1 and v2. It 
> suggests that
> the CPA indicate which MSH version each party is using in order to
> facilitate ad-hoc solutions to interoperability based on a 
> party installing
> both versions of the MSH.   Presumably such a version 
> indicator would be
> part of the ebXML binding information.
> 
> While it has not been submitted as a formal comment, we might wish to
> consider it now or post-V2.
> 
> 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
> **************************************************************
> ***********************
> ----- Forwarded by Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM on 05/16/2002 
> 06:22 PM -----
>                                                               
>                                                                
>                       Andrzej Jan                             
>                                                                
>                       Taramina                 To:       Rudi 
> Wirth <wirth@exln.com>                                         
>                       <andrzej@chaeron.        cc:       
> ebxml-dev@lists.ebxml.org                                           
>                       com>                     Subject:  Re: 
> [ebxml-dev] MSH 1.0 vs 2.0?                                     
>                                                               
>                                                                
>                       05/16/2002 06:05                        
>                                                                
>                       PM                                      
>                                                                
>                       Please respond to                       
>                                                                
>                       andrzej                                 
>                                                                
>                                                               
>                                                                
>                                                               
>                                                                
> 
> 
> 
> Rudi:
> 
> > In our particular case, it would be the combination of the "adapter"
> > name and the CPA location (by partyid).  In other words, 
> you'd configure
> > two named ebXML adapters (ie MSH) as ie "ebxml104" and 
> "ebxml" (2.0),
> > both with the appropriate .jar, and then the respective CPA per
> > participant/party.  Otherwise, if you'd get the MSH version 
> number from
> > the CPA, you'd have to write conditonal ebXML java code if 
> you keyed the
> > adapter with just "ebxml".  Hmm .. I guess conditional code 
> works fine
> > for minor version changes, ie 2.0-2.01, in which case the 
> header would
> > contain the ebMS string.
> 
> The problem I see with this is that it is a vendor specfic
> solution....which seems a bit
> out of place in an ebXML implementation that is supposedly 
> standards based.
> 
> Inbound messages should not be a big deal, since the ebXML 
> Message Header
> provides a version attribute (1.0 or 2.0 right now) that an MSH
> implementation (either
> custom coded for part of a vendor solution) could use to 
> determine how to
> parse the
> incoming message.  Alternatively, it would be fairly easy to specify
> different endpoint
> URLs in the CPA that is in place with a specific trading 
> partner, and these
> URLs
> would correspond to the MSH spec level supported by the particular
> endpoint.  I
> expect that vendors of commerical MSH software will handle 
> this scenario as
> a
> matter of course.
> 
> The more problematic part is sending of outgoing messages, 
> since you need
> to
> figure out what version level your partner expects before sending the
> message out
> (unless you get lucky and they support both versions as noted above).
> 
> I would have thought that this would be something that should 
> have been
> also
> specified in the CPA (and CPP's as well), but cannot find 
> anything in the
> CPPA 1.9
> spec that would allow this.  Either I have missed something 
> obvious.....or
> the CPPA
> spec is lacking in this regard and needs to be extended to handle this
> scenario.  The
> alternative is to rely on vendor/proprietary solutions for outbound
> messages, which is
> not a very attractive proposition!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ...Andrzej
> 
> Chaeron Corporation
> http://www.chaeron.com
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> The ebxml-dev list is sponsored by OASIS.
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.ebxml.org/ob/adm.pl>
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
>