OASIS ebXML Messaging Services TC

Re: [ebxml-msg] RE: The Return Path Problem

  • 1.  Re: [ebxml-msg] RE: The Return Path Problem

    Posted 11-12-2001 16:46
    In my mind, the topic of your paper is closely related to the
    questions I've been asking about "how do you name an MSH" or "how do
    you name a party".  I think there has been some confusion about what
    we mean by a "party": is "ABC Co" is a party, or is "Order Management
    MSH" a party?  Marty seemed to be suggesting the latter, to which I
    replied that then a "partyId" would not be an identifier of a "party".
    
    It looks to me like you're assuming:
      -- ABC Co. is one "party".  Order Management MSH is not a "party".
      -- A "party" is identified by a "partyId" (i.e. each partyId denotes
    	one specific "party".
      -- There is one CPA, between the "parties", so there isn't a separate
    	CPA for the different paths shown in your figure 1-1.
    
    In your paper, you suggest using the Service and Action fields in
    order to figure out how to route the message.  It seems to me that
    there is a tacit assumption behind this suggestion, which I think
    needs to be made explicit.  It assumes that you never have two
    distinct MSH's within one "party" that both implement the same
    Service/Action.
    
    Is this really a safe assumption?  If a "party" might be a large
    corporation, the corporation could have many divisions, each of which
    provides the service "Purchasing" with the action "Submit PO".
    
    It seems to me that Service & Action are an assertion about *what* to
    do, not *who* is doing it.  For routing, we want to use "who-like"
    information.