ebxml-cppa message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Subject: [ebxml-cppa] Intermediaries
- From: "Damodaran, Suresh" <Suresh_Damodaran@stercomm.com>
- To: 'Dale Moberg' <dmoberg@cyclonecommerce.com>,Tony Fletcher <tony_fletcher@btopenworld.com>,Martin W Sachs <mwsachs@us.ibm.com>, ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org
- Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 14:22:07 -0500
Dale
et al,
There
was some discussion on the definition of "intermediary" on the CPPA mailing
list some time in the past.
If
somebody could post a summary of the consensus, it would help me
much.
I have
the following ideas on intermediary FWIW - and hopefully the TC
consensus is not wildly different!
I am
trying to present this in the form of a taxonomy, but pardon me if it doesn't
exactly look formal.
First
I define a "technical intermediary," and then contrast with "business
intermediary"
Technical Intermediary:
1.
Intermediary is not at the transport (==OSI application protocol layer - e.g.
http, smtp, ftp) layer,
and it
is at the message layer or service layer. In particular, an
intermediary MUST parse the ebXML (SOAP) message.
However, an intermediary will not change the
messageId.
2.
Intermediaries could exhibit different behaviors w.r.t. the
message
- relay/proxy intermediary -
relays the received message with no changes to the received
message.
e.g, caching
intermediaries
- security intermediaries (that
change the security attributes of the message)
e.g, signer, encryptor/decryptor,
etc.
- processing intermediaries (that
process the message and change the message - but will not change the
messageId)
3.
Intermediaries can also be classified based on whether they have a CPP or
not.
Thus, I have defined above two axes of definition for
intermediaries based on (a) effect on a message (b) existence of
profile
Perhaps there are more axes?
Business Intermediary:
Now,
if we think about business intermediaries, how do they differ from
above?
Couple
of examples:
- Shipping agent: This is a business intermediary that has
a CPP, but it is not a technical intermediary. Because
shipping agent will change the messageId, it is not a
technical intermediary.
- Notary - a notary may have a CPP, but could also be a
technical intermediary, because a notary may simply
add its signature on a message that it
receives.
Thanks
for your comments in advance.
Sincerely,
-Suresh
Sterling
Commerce
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC