[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: T2 PLEAE READ - Suggested solution to RM Issues
Date: Fri, 07 Sep 2001 16:07:05 -0700 From: "Burdett, David" <david.burdett@commerceone.com> Suppose you have three parties, A, B and C. B is an intermediary. A & B agree to use ebXML. B and C agree to use the BizTalk Framework (which also supports reliable messaging). So you can get end-to-end reliable messaging as all hops are reliable. I think your words would not allow this use case because the second hop is not ebXML. How would you make this use case work?" I don't understand how this kind of use case works at all. Are you saying that A and C are conducting a business transaction with each other, and B is acting as an intermediary, and yet A and C aren't in any sense using the same protocol? Is there an ebXML CPA between A and C? Is there a BPSS that A and C have agreed upon? If so, I would say that A and C are both using ebXML. B and C might agree to use BizTalk Framework as an underlying communications protocol; that is, they might use BizTalk Framework in place of HTTP or SMTP. Then they would not need to use ebXML-style "retry if you don't get an Acknowledgment" because they have an underlying reliable protocol. (Ditto if they communicate using MQSeries.) But, C is definitely running an ebXML MSH. Or are you sahing that A is conducting a business transaction with B, and the business process on B is simultaneously engaging in business processes with both A and C? That's fine, but in that case there isn't any concept of messages being sent from A to C or C to A; A and C would not even know about each other. -- Dan
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC