David, A clarification - do you really mean to say that existence of a config file vs. a CPA always = lack of pre-agreement on some parameters ? If so, I don't agree. Ebusiness can be accomplished with config files that are created as the result of pre-agreement on some or all of the necessary parameters between trading partners (just like it is for the most part today). For whatever reason, businesses, private exchanges, etc. may in the future continue to operate this way, even when implmenting the ebXML message service. Granted, a config file can also be used as a default bootstrap mechanism where no pre-agreement exists, but I don't believe we can exclude the other case. Regards, Colleen David Fischer wrote: > Dale, > > I agree with you but I also must point out that configuration does not > necessarily mean mutual agreement. What if I set retries to 3 and you set to 5. > Does this really make any difference? I don't think so. However, if you make a > configuration decision like syncReply=true, then I need to know and, if we have > not previously agreed, you need to indicate this in the headers. > > TRP agreed not to require a CPA. I have never taken that to mean a lack of a > configuration file (although nothing says the structure of the configuration > file has to match the CPA spec). I have always taken that to mean a lack of > pre-agreement on some parameters. This might mean I download your > url/service/action from a registry and send you an unsolicited business > document. This is what I mean by bootstrap. > > Regards, > > David Fischer > Drummond Group. > >