RE: How do I poll for messages?

["Morin, Paul" <prm@scinteract.com>]

I agree SMTP could be used as an outbound alternative for TPs who do not
have an "always on" connection, but its likely to force the TP to use two
different protocols.  HTTP to send, POP or IMAP to receive.  Now its a
software implementation issue that may be 
"widely inefficient" depending on who's tools the TP is using...

I've never pushed this issue because the process is available in the AIAG's
E-5 Guideline for TCP/IP Message Routing.  We call it "obtain" and it works
great.  The smaller TP sends an XML query to the remote server that bundles
like documents into a multipart response.  The client then issues an XML Ack
for each document they correctly receive and process.  I agree that its not
as efficient as PUSH, but in the automotive industry we have a large number
of very small trading partners that need a "dialup" solution...

<editorial>
We'll never create a single message routing standard to make everyone
(individuals and industries alike) happy.  I'd much rather deal with several
"simple" standards than one hugely complex beast that's impossible to build
and distribute at a reasonable cost.
</editorial>

 - Paul


-----Original Message-----
From: christopher ferris [mailto:chris.ferris@east.sun.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2001 9:07 AM
To: Cameron Young
Cc: ebXML Transport
Subject: Re: How do I poll for messages?


Cameron,

Typically, this would be handled via use of SMTP as a 
(sending) transport and IMAP or POP as the "polling" mechanism
with the queue being your mail spool.

The "polling" of messages via HTTP would be widely inefficient,
especially if there are many prospective parties that might have
queued messages for you! It would also impose a costly
requirement on the part of your partners to have to persistently
store your (and others like you) messages.

HTH,

Chris

Cameron Young wrote:
> 
> Sending messages is OK.
> 
> But, if I'm a simple MSH that doesn't have a permanent connection, how
> do I check (poll) for messages?
> 
> I'd like a "Message Request" added to Section 9. That will cause the MSH
> to respond with any queued messages for which the To Party matches my
> sent MessageRequest:From Party.
> 
> There would have to be an error message indicating no messages pending.
> 
> It can be really simple and only return one message at a time.
> 
> Or is this going to go in another spec?
> 
> Regards,
> Cameron Young