Re: [ebxml-msg] Minutes 12/03/01 - Voting Meeting

[Arvola Chan <arvola@tibco.com>]

David:

I agree. If the CPA says *perMessage*, and the sender does not desire RM
behavior, then it will not include an AckRequested element in the SOAP
header.

Regards,
-Arvola

-----Original Message-----
From: David Fischer <david@drummondgroup.com>
To: Christopher Ferris <chris.ferris@sun.com>
Cc: Arvola Chan <arvola@tibco.com>; ebXML Msg
<ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org>
Date: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 8:43 AM
Subject: RE: [ebxml-msg] Minutes 12/03/01 - Voting Meeting


Yes, AckRequested MUST be in the message if using RM.  However, if the CPA
says
*perMessage* and we are NOT using RM then there would NOT be an AckRequested
element.  Right?

David.

-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Ferris [mailto:chris.ferris@sun.com]
Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2001 9:30 AM
To: David Fischer
Cc: Arvola Chan; ebXML Msg
Subject: Re: [ebxml-msg] Minutes 12/03/01 - Voting Meeting


No, the AckRequested element (SOAP block) MUST be in the
message for RM to function. The indicator in the CPA is for
the sending node to determine whether or not to include the
AckRequested element, not for the receiving end to determine
whether RM is in vogue or not.

Cheers,

Chris

David Fischer wrote:

> Arvola,
>
> If AckRequested is *true* in the CPA, then does the AckRequested element
have
to
> appear?  If it MUST appear, then why have it in the CPA?  I think the
Receiving
> MSH must send an Acknowledgment in this case even if AckRequested does not
> appear.  Actually, I would prefer that AckRequested MUST NOT appear if the
CPA
> says *true* or *false*.
>
> If AckRequested is *perMessage* in the CPA, then what happens if the
> AckRequested element does not appear?  The spec says this means no
> Acknowledgment.  The default then is *false* if the CPA says *perMessage*.
>
> I think we should not have multiple rules about *perMessage*.  If a
default is
> provided in one case, then it should work the same in all cases.  Since
the
> absence of an Acknowledgment element means *false* then the absence of
> duplicateElimination should also mean *false* and the absence of a signed
> attribute should mean *false* (or in all cases it means take the default).
>
> David.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arvola Chan [mailto:arvola@tibco.com]
> Sent: Monday, December 03, 2001 5:05 PM
> To: David Fischer; ebXML Msg
> Subject: Re: [ebxml-msg] Minutes 12/03/01 - Voting Meeting
>
>
> David:
>
> I don't agree with the last sentence in the following paragraph within
your
> meeting minutes:
>
>
>>PerMessage parameters:  Colleen, what parameters have been identified.
>>
> Arvola:  >duplicateElimination, AckRequested, AckRequested/signed.  Dale:
> perMessage in >CPA means no agreement.  Colleen: what about defaults.
Dale:
> OK.  Ian:  add to >document, if there is a conflict then generate error /
> define error - <<next item>>.  >Consensus is that perMessage does not
> require item to appear, there may be an >MSH default.
>
> I have been assuming that the AckRequested element must be present in a
> message before the receiver will return an Acknowledgment. The Message
> Service Interface may have a default to allow the application above to
omit
> the specification of whether an Acknowledgment is desired. The sending MSH
> must include an AckRequested element in a message if it expects to receipt
> an Acknowledgment for it.
>
> Similarly, the sending MSH must specify an appropriate value for the
> duplicateElimination attribute in the QualityOfServiceInfo element, one
that
> does not conflict with the specification within the CPA.
>
> Regards,
> -Arvola
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Fischer <david@drummondgroup.com>
> To: ebXML Msg <ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Date: Monday, December 03, 2001 12:51 PM
> Subject: [ebxml-msg] Minutes 12/03/01 - Voting Meeting
>
>
> These are the minutes from Monday's voting meeting.
>
> I thought we achieved consensus on the error code issue concerning
> NotSupported/Inconsistent but talking to some members afterwards, this is
> not
> clear.
>
> Does anyone object to changing the error code on Ping, Pong,
MessageStatus,
> duplicateElimination and AckRequested to Inconsistent?  This means the
only
> thing in the spec with NotSupported is MessageOrder.
>
> Regards,
>
> David Fischer
> Drummond Group
> ebXML-MS Editor.
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> 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>