Re: [ebxml-msg-comment] Public Comment

["David Webber \(XML\)" <david@drrw.info>]

Daneel,

Those are indeed dated sources.  But very good questions.

Overall I would say it should not be too tough to integrate
an AS/2 handler into all this (I presume some people already
have AS/2 servers and want to have a transition period).
Actually migrating from As/2 to ebMS should also be pretty
quick. Just need to have ebMS tool such as Hermes (see
below) to deliver and receive payloads for you.  The existing
payloads should work as-is - just need to have CPA information
for the your partner delivery now as well.

To bring you up to date check out the latest work presented at
XML2004 Interop.

You can download all this from:  http://www.ebxmlbook.com/interop

The integration of ebMS, CPA, Registry and CAM delivers way more than
AS2 alone can.  Specifically if you are wanting to have self-provisioning
for
partners - then clearly this approach is the way to go - with the registry
managing your partner profiles and the associated transaction rules, and
then integration directly into the ebMS allows verification, validation and
data handling to all occur driven by the content in the ebXML message
envelopes.

This also gives future extensiblity to take advantage of BPSS V2 as soon
as solutions are available for that - planning right now is mid to late 2005
on that.

Also - for general overview on all this - try the Benefits of ebXML white
paper - http://www.ebxmlbook.com/benefits    and then for note on
other adopting this - see the UK NHS commitment to using ebXML for
their backbone for hospital message exchanges:-

 http://www.ebxml.org/case_studies/NHS-ebMSG-casestudy-041206.pdf

along with the Hong Kong release of Hermes V2.0 (see
http://www.freebxml.org)

Let me know if you need more.

Thanks, DW

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <comment-form@oasis-open.org>
To: <ebxml-msg-comment@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Friday, February 11, 2005 2:58 AM
Subject: [ebxml-msg-comment] Public Comment


> Comment from: daneel_p@yahoo.com
>
> Hi,
>
> Recently, a committee/group was considering only the use of AS2 for
communication of business specific information and connectivity to the
related industry wide registry.
>
> After some discussions, there is now a willingness to also consider ebMS.
However, as part of the process, a document that specifies the
appropriateness of ebMS and its architecture (eg, for a registry with dual
protocol) has been requested.  I've been asked to assist in this... As a
matter of fact, we have already implemented ebXML based templates for
various business documents (PO, Invoice etc) between retailers and suppliers
so it was a natural step.
>
> I would like to seek comments, advise and verification on some of the
relevant points related to consideration of AS2 and ebMS in two areas.  I
would also, of course, be grateful for any other comments...
>
> 1. ebMS Appropriateness:  In the area of ebMS appropriateness wrt AS2, I
believe it sufficient to demonstrate ebMS to be of minimally equal of AS2,
if not better.  I have read both the "e-Business Messaging Interchange
Assessment" Whitepaper from the OASIS/CEFACT JMT Team (May 2003) and
Drummond Group's DGI Guide on "AS2, ebXML or SOAP: Which Messaging Standard
to Select for Your Supply Chain and Why" and found them really useful but
would like to check/asks a few questions.  Specifically, not sure if some of
the claims are dated etc... eg.
>
> a. Drummond states to choose AS2 now and move towards ebMS or SOAP later
as ebMS is still in early adoption whilst AS2 is more mature (how's about
for registry?).  Is that a still valid claim today?
>
> b. Drummond states that both standards can be used to transfer any type of
data, but JMT says that AS2 is heavily based on EDI style payloads and
mechanisms (I couldn't find any specifics on what this means?)... is that a
special case understanding I need to have?
>
> c. Drummond also stated that ebMS is only starting in production and
garnered attention from vertical and MNCs whilst AS2 adoption has been
growing exponentially with high adoption in Retail and CPG (esp thru UCC &
Wal-Mart).  Is that a current status?
>
>
> 2. Technical Architecture: In the area of implementation architecture, I
think I have no problem on the end-end components.
>
> a. I have some questions on whether a dual-protocol (AS2 & ebMS) registry
has been something anyone has done before?
>
> b. And whether there are any particular "traps" I should be aware of...
>
> c. I couldn't, technically, see any component that the AS2 implementation
that isn't duplicable (I only need a 1-way mapping?) on ebMS whether wrapper
or payload structure.  It looks like AS2 has a few choices that are made at
implementation time, but that can equally be mapped to ebMS.  Is there
something I'm missing?  I could equally bind the ebMS implementation to
HTTP/HTTPS like AS2 to simplify connectivity choices if needed.  The only
thing was "Data Compression" which was highlighted in Drummond, I'm not sure
if that's an ebMS issue?
>
> d. I think the "tricky" issue would be in the various supplier and
retailer IDs/accounts across the different protocols... any thoughts on this
welcomed.
>
> Well those are the things that crossed my mind when I was thinking thru
this, am opened to other suggestions for sure!
>
> My thanks for anyone who read this far!  I look forward to any exchange,
responses or feedback...
>
> Thanks!!
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Daneel Pang
> daneel_p@yahoo.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Two err is human.  Three? Challenged!
> Eventually, everything will be there...
> I need this yesterday.
>
>
>