OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ebxml-transport message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]


Subject: RE: Test Indicator Issue


Hi, 

I haven't said much on this lately, but I can't just let this go.

What you are talking about is application stuff, not MS.  If we 
have any kind layering at all (i.e., the app can't get its hands 
on the MS envelope, a "test flsg" in the MS header is lost to the 
app unless you have an interface (at least a conceptual one) which 
defines the "test" parameter as part of the service. 

In the good ole days, we used to write code where anything could 
get its mitts on anything (I used to do it and I'm sure you did 
too).  However, with layered systems and objects and all this 
good stuff (which doesn't fit in 2K bytes -- no typo, not 2M ;-)
you can't do this anymore!! (Well, OK, you're not supposed to).

Suggestion (which can be ignored): Either put this in application 
protocol or define a conceptual interface (or, call it a conceptual 
service if you like :-).

Best regards,
Henry
-------------------------------------
At 10:55 AM 11/28/2000 -0500, Miller, Robert (GXS) wrote:
>Dick,
>
>Yes, DB copy is easier. And yes, a recipient could use the same database if
>it were preloaded with dual sets of URL's/PartyIDs.  But I feel you have
>missed the point about having dual sets of URL's (or PartyID's).  Some piece
>of software has to insert the URL into the outbound message.  The logic
>required to maintain pairs of URLs and get the right one inserted into the
>message seems inherently more complex than a simple test flag. Note also
>that testing is typically a two way street (e.g., query / response), so both
>ends have to deal with the dual URL problem.
>
>I am aware that some EDI players choose to use separate EDI addresses
>(PartyIDs) for test purposes.  I've no idea whether they also set the test
>flag in the EDI interchange.  I certainly do not mean to exclude the use of
>separate URLs and/or PartyIDs for those who choose to use them.
>
>Cheers,
>        Bob
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Dick Brooks [mailto:dick@8760.com]
>Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 4:22 PM
>To: Miller, Robert (GXS); ebxml-transport@lists.ebxml.org
>Subject: RE: Test Indicator Issue
>
>
>Bob, see response inline:
>
>>
>> The tables which select the URL to which to deliver the payloads, whether
>> these tables be in the application code on in some middleware,
>> would have to
>> differ between the production system and the test system.  And there might
>> be dozens of URL's each of which needs both a production and a development
>> entry.  And the tables might be stored in the same database as
>> other tables,
>> so when a database is copied from production to test, the changes
>> have to be
>> re-introduced.
>>
>
>If I understand your point correctly you're saying that by having a test
>flag you're able to maintain the same data in both a test and production
>database and can easily copy data between the two, correct?
>
>If so, then I think one could say the same thing when two separate URL's are
>used, for example:
>
>http://test.company.com/ebxmlhandler
>
>and
>
>http://production.company.com/ebxmlhandler
>
>Both URL's could share a single trading partner database instance, but use
>separate processing logic on the application payload.
>
>
>Dick Brooks
>Group 8760
>110 12th Street North
>Birmingham, AL 35203
>dick@8760.com
>205-250-8053
>Fax: 205-250-8057
>http://www.8760.com/
>
>InsideAgent - Empowering e-commerce solutions
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Miller, Robert (GXS) [mailto:Robert.Miller@gxs.ge.com]
>> Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 10:08 AM
>> To: ebxml-transport@lists.ebxml.org
>> Subject: RE: Test Indicator Issue
>>
>>
>> List-Unsubscribe:
>>  <mailto:ebxml-transport-request@lists.ebxml.org?body=unsubscribe>
>> List-Archive: <http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-transport>
>> List-Help: <http://lists.ebxml.org/doc/email-manage.html>,
>>  <mailto:ebxml-transport-request@lists.ebxml.org?body=help>
>>
>> Dick,
>>
>> The tables which select the URL to which to deliver the payloads, whether
>> these tables be in the application code on in some middleware,
>> would have to
>> differ between the production system and the test system.  And there might
>> be dozens of URL's each of which needs both a production and a development
>> entry.  And the tables might be stored in the same database as
>> other tables,
>> so when a database is copied from prodcution to test, the changes
>> have to be
>> re-introduced.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>         Bob
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Dick Brooks [mailto:dick@8760.com]
>> Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 9:56 AM
>> To: Miller, Robert (GXS); Nikola Stojanovic;
>> ebxml-transport@lists.ebxml.org
>> Subject: RE: Test Indicator Issue
>>
>>
>> Bob,
>>
>> I don't understand how separate test/production URL's does the following:
>>
>> > referenced below.  But I contend that these other ways reduce the
>> > parallelism of the test system to a greater extent than does a
>> test flag.
>>
>> Please explain. Thanks.
>>
>>
>> Dick Brooks
>> Group 8760
>> 110 12th Street North
>> Birmingham, AL 35203
>> dick@8760.com
>> 205-250-8053
>> Fax: 205-250-8057
>> http://www.8760.com/
>>
>> InsideAgent - Empowering e-commerce solutions
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Miller, Robert (GXS) [mailto:Robert.Miller@gxs.ge.com]
>> > Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 9:23 AM
>> > To: Nikola Stojanovic; ebxml-transport@lists.ebxml.org
>> > Subject: RE: Test Indicator Issue
>> >
>> >
>> > List-Unsubscribe:
>> >  <mailto:ebxml-transport-request@lists.ebxml.org?body=unsubscribe>
>> > List-Archive: <http://lists.ebxml.org/archives/ebxml-transport>
>> > List-Help: <http://lists.ebxml.org/doc/email-manage.html>,
>> >  <mailto:ebxml-transport-request@lists.ebxml.org?body=help>
>> >
>> > Yes there are other ways to indicate a 'test' message, two of which are
>> > referenced below.  But I contend that these other ways reduce the
>> > parallelism of the test system to a greater extent than does a
>> test flag.
>> > Use of a test flag is a proven practice. So my advice is add the
>> > test flag -
>> > "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> >        Bob Miller
>> >
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Nikola Stojanovic [mailto:nhomest1@twcny.rr.com]
>> > Sent: Monday, November 27, 2000 8:57 AM
>> > To: ebxml-transport@lists.ebxml.org
>> > Subject: Re: First issue [was: Outstanding Issues - LONG please red to
>> > end}
>> >
>> >
>> > <Dick Brooks>
>> > There are others means to indicate a "test" versus "production" message
>> > exchange. For example:
>> > - separate production and test ebxml handler URL's (mailboxes,
>> FTP sites,
>> > etc.)
>> > - separate production and test Party ID's
>> > </Dick Brooks>
>> >
>> > Makes sense. I agree.
>> >
>> > Nikola
>> >



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]

Search: Match: Sort by:
Words: | Help


Powered by eList eXpress LLC