RE: Explicit & Implicit acknowledgements

[Rik Drummond <rvd2@worldnet.att.net>]

i will schedule this at the first part of the call nick.....looks like we
will have some interesting discussion.... rik

-----Original Message-----
From: Nicholas Kassem [mailto:nick.kassem@eng.sun.com]
Sent: Friday, September 29, 2000 1:18 PM
To: Rik Drummond; ebXML Transport (E-mail)
Subject: RE: Explicit & Implicit acknowledgements


Thank you for posting this. If this topic shows up early in your agenda I
will call in before the POC conf. call on Thursday. I don't think we are
far off. I would however prefer to promote a simpler, consistent
programming model at the Business Process level making no assumptions about
the environment within which the Business Process is running in.  It should
be possible to develop a Business Application such that requests are issued
over HTTP with responses arriving over say POP/IMAP. Alternatively requests
may be issues over SMTP with responses arriving over HTTP. In fact the
transport characteristics is a deployment time decision driven by the PA.
IMHO, we have traditionally wired transport behavior into the application,
in a messaging environment we have the luxury of avoiding this.

Regards,
Nick

At 10:58 PM 9/28/2000 -0500, Rik Drummond wrote:
>david, i think it would be good to discuss this on the conference call next
>week to make sure those who were not there really  understand it... i know
>you have described a real world problem.... but i am not sure yet of the
>solution.  lets get everyone up to speed.. take some time to discuss it
next
>week.... best regards, rik
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Burdett, David [mailto:david.burdett@commerceone.com]
>Sent: Thursday, September 28, 2000 8:02 PM
>To: ebXML Transport (E-mail)
>Subject: Explicit & Implicit acknowledgements
>
>
>Folks
>
>I attach a presentation that most of you in Dallas this week have seen all
>or part of. It describes how you can acknowledge receipt of messages
>"implicitly.
>
>I also think that, when using HTTP, we can always send back an explicit ack
>on the HTTP response and we don't need to do this with a separate HTTP
post.
>
>
>So using the principle that we should not have two ways of doing something
>when one will do, I suggest that we adopt this approach unless someone can
>come up with reasons why it won't work.
>
>David
>  <<Alternative protocol bindings.ppt>>
>
>Product Management, CommerceOne
>4400 Rosewood Drive 3rd Fl, Bldg 4, Pleasanton, CA 94588, USA
>Tel: +1 (925) 520 4422 (also voicemail); Pager: +1 (888) 936 9599
>mailto:david.burdett@commerceone.com; Web: http://www.commerceone.com