RE: test message

[David Burdett <david.burdett@commerceone.com>]

Henry

The list I came up with is in the presentation that Rik sent out in an email
earlier today. This is the presentation that I gave at ebXML on Friday. I
also reproduce the list here. Perhaps we want to review the list to see if
anything needs to be added/taken away. For example we definitely need to
identify more scenarios.

David
----------------
List of Requirements from ebXML presentation ...
1. How to envelope business documents
	a) related messages in a collection 
	b) Physical and/or logical addressing of destination for messages
2. Reliable Messaging - you need to know the document got there exactly once
3. Routing of messages to single or multiple destination, publish &
subscribe (content and subject based), broadcast messages, streaming
4. Application level not transport level needed, wire format mapping,
support for multiple transport protocols
5. Security and use of digital signatures for non-repudiation, and
confidentiality/encryption
6. Audit trails and traceability/trackability of transactions/documents
7. Quality of service
	a) Processes/transactions complete within required time
	b) Non-transaction vs transaction, exactly once behavior
	c) Level of service negotiation
	d) Service availability checking
	e) Transaction Status Inquiry
	f) Session based & long term transactions
8. Platform Independent Interoperability
9. Restart and recovery - backup/rollback of business transactions
10. Workflow of business documents
11. Scenarios
	a) Product catalog
	b) Requisition to pay
	c) ... more to come
12. Scalable from SMEs and large companies
13. Define a small initial scope but extensible to add new things in later
versions

-----Original Message-----
From: Henry Lowe [mailto:hlowe@omg.org]
Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 1999 2:51 PM
To: Rik Drummond
Cc: Ebxml Transport
Subject: RE: test message


Rik,

David Burdett compiled a list of requirements for the Transport 
WG.  Can you distribute that list?  or perhaps David can if you 
don't have it.  

The reason for this is that I recall we were going to take and 
correlate that list with existing specs (perhaps it would be nice 
to indicate whether they are implemented in supported, commercially 
available products).  This seems like something that could be done
(well, started at least) by e-mail.  OK, we may want to agree 
the list first.

Henry

PS: the 1 December date for ConCall is OK with me.
-------------------------------------------------
At 10:54 AM 11/23/1999 -0600, Rik Drummond wrote:
>Looks like or listserv is up and running for ebxml transport group. Rik
>