David,
As I explained in my response to Arvola, it appears that at present, each
delivery channel must have a unique endpoint address. I suggested saying
that in version 1.1 of the CPP-CPA spec and then working on associating
multiple delivery channels with the same endpoint address (adding an
additional element to disambiguate), if there is a good case for doing so,
for version 2.0.
We certainly want to avoid putting elements in the message header whose
sole purpose is to make up for deficiencies in the CPA 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
*************************************************************************************
David Fischer <david@drummondgroup.com> on 08/21/2001 10:59:07 AM
To: Martin W Sachs/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
cc: ebXML Msg <ebxml-msg@lists.oasis-open.org>
Subject: RE: T2 SyncReply and ReliableMessagingMethod in
QualityOfServiceInfo
This is exactly the problem I see. How do I send to the same address but
slightly vary the parameters (change SyncReply from True to False)? Chris
suggested (I think) that all that was necessary was to define another
DeliveryChannel. I don't understand how this solves the problem since I
can't
figure out how to tell the receiver which DeliveryChannel to use -- maybe I
can't by design which means this solution won't work. This is too tightly
coupled!
Am I missing the mark? If not, then I need to go back to my original
premise
that SyncReply needs to be in MessageHeader.
Regards,
David Fischer
Drummond Group.