[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: RE: [ebxml-cppa] RE: [ebxml-msg] CPA & MS overriding parameters
Suresh, The CPA Negotiation subteam is aware of the need to be able to bootstrap the negotiation process. Since we have not done any detailed work on it yet, it is probably not appropriate for the MSG team to put anything in the V 1.1 spec. 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 ************************************************************************************* "Damodaran, Suresh" <Suresh_Damodaran@stercomm.com> on 11/26/2001 10:59:44 AM To: "'Arvola Chan'" <arvola@tibco.com>, "'Tony Fletcher'" <tony_fletcher@btopenworld.com>, ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org, ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org cc: Subject: RE: [ebxml-cppa] RE: [ebxml-msg] CPA & MS overriding parameters Arvola, I read the proposal with much interest. Looks good to me based on my current understanding. I have a few minor items you may consider. 1. There was a "signed" attribute in your first proposal which seems to have disappeared in the second one. Was that a typo? 2. Please consider "perCPA" instead of "fixed" since we already have "perMessage" (unless "fixed" has other semantics) Another problem which may touch upon negotiation is, can we have a message that does not require a CPA? (don't you need one to bootstrap CPA creation negotiations?) Should we have some statement that covers this issue? Regards, -Suresh -----Original Message----- From: Arvola Chan [mailto:arvola@tibco.com] Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 11:30 AM To: Damodaran, Suresh; 'Tony Fletcher'; ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org; ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org Subject: Re: [ebxml-cppa] RE: [ebxml-msg] CPA & MS overriding parameters Suresh: Please see my proposal in http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-msg/200111/msg00253.html Regards, -Arvola -----Original Message----- From: Damodaran, Suresh <Suresh_Damodaran@stercomm.com> To: 'Tony Fletcher' <tony_fletcher@btopenworld.com>; ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org <ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org>; ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org <ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org> Date: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 8:57 AM Subject: RE: [ebxml-cppa] RE: [ebxml-msg] CPA & MS overriding parameters >I am encouraged and hopeful that a solution to this issue will be found >based on the "permessage" idea (as per Dale's earlier email "observer's >report"). >The three cases that Tony outlines below may be used >for analysis of individual entries in the CPA. >It is not clear how the "permessage" notion will be built into the CPP. >I plan to wait to see a clear description of the solution before further >commenting. > >Regards, >-Suresh > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Tony Fletcher [mailto:tony_fletcher@btopenworld.com] >Sent: Friday, November 16, 2001 3:15 AM >To: ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org; ebxml-cppa@lists.oasis-open.org >Subject: RE: [ebxml-cppa] RE: [ebxml-msg] CPA & MS overriding parameters > > >Dear All, > >I would have thought that there are three cases that need to be allowed for >in the CPA: > >1) The two parties to the CPA agree explicitly or implicitly that a >parameter is not specified in the CPA and is to be handled by messaging as >per the messaging spec. (which could be implicit, per session, per message, >etc.) > >2) The two parties to the CPA agree to specify a default value in the >CPA >which is used if not present in the messaging exchange explicitly, but may >be overridden by the use of the messaging service on a per message or per >session basis. > >3) The two parties to the CPA agree to specify the parameter in the CPA >and >that is the value that shall be used - no messing! > >The Messaging and CPP/A groups need to agree which out 1), 2) & 3) are >appropriate for each parameter of the messaging service. > >If the messaging group meeting has already passed this point and made a >workable agreement then fine - I was only adding to the thread, not meaning >to re-open discussion. > >Best Regards Tony >A M Fletcher >Choreology Ltd., 13 Austin Friars, London EC2N 2JX UK >Tel: +44 (0) 20 76701784 Mobile: +44 (0) 7801 948219 >tony.fletcher@choreology.com <mailto:tony.fletcher@choreology.com> >(Home: amfletcher@iee.org) > > > >---------------------------------------------------------------- >To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription >manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> > >---------------------------------------------------------------- >To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription >manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl> ---------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC