RE: T2 - Assertions and Questions

[David Fischer <david@drummondgroup.com>]

Yes, I'm saying that the address you are sending to may be a relay which is not
the final address.  If I have no persistent connection then I might use a C1 as
my mailbox much as if I used an ISP to get eMail.  The C1 application cannot
send a DR back.  I must send it myself to ensure delivery.  When I send to an
ISP address and request a DR, they do not send back a receipt saying it was put
in an eMail box, my local client does that.  My client is part MSH level (POP
retrieval) and part Application level (GUI).  In this case, the receipt is sent
back at the client MSH level.

Actually, your example is correct and this is exactly what happens with the IRS.
If the IRS does not receive your tax forms that is your problem not theirs (and
yes, you owe them a late fee even if you were impeccable).  That is why when
sending anything important (like to the IRS) I ALWAYS request registered mail.
Registered mail is end-to-end not hop-to-hop.  With registered mail, you can
prove they got it.  This only works because the end signs for it, not an IM.
When I send registered (reliably) to the IRS, even though it is addressed to a
PO, the post office must go to the IRS office and get someone to sign.  They
don't just sign it themselves saying they put it in a PO box.  With someone like
AMEX, the Postoffice (will not delivery reliably to a PO box) does not just put
the mail in the mailbox but they actually go into the office and get a
signature.  This might be from a legal proxy (bill collecting company) or from
an employee of AMEX.  In my example, C1 was not a legal proxy.

Regards,

David Fischer
Drummond Group.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Weinreb [mailto:dlw@exceloncorp.com]
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 1:45 PM
To: david@drummondgroup.com
Cc: ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: T2 - Assertions and Questions


   Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2001 09:49:38 -0500
   From: David Fischer <david@drummondgroup.com>

Very interesting.  It seems as if you're talking about a scenario in
which Party P publishes an address A in P's CPP, with the following
meaning: "If you want to talk to me, send your message to address A.
However, I don't promise that I'll actually receive everything that is
succesfully delivered to A."  Is that right?

That's sort of strange.  Suppose American Express said "If you want to
pay your bill, mail your bill to A", and I mail my bill to A, and then
Amex claims that they never got my bill and I own them a late charge.
I dispute the late charge, saying that I sent the bill exactly where
they told me to send it, and I have a delivery receipt from A to prove
it.

They reply that even though they published address A, they never
promised that they'd actually receive and process everything sent to
A.  Furthermore, I should not have assumed that they ever got the
bill, because I never got a delivery receipt signed by Amex's own
signature, and even though Amex publishes address A, the folks at A
are not authorized to sign Amex's signature (i.e. don't have Amex's
private key, or whatever).

So I'm stuck with a late charge, even though I behaved impeccably.

Maybe "Send the bills that you're obliged to pay to address A" is
fundamentally different from "If you want to buy something from me,
send it to address A".  I guess this is more subtle than I had realized.

-- Dan

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