RE: T2 The answer isn't always "you need a CPA"

Dale/Marty

I am not aiming to bloat the message header I am trying to fix a real
problem the same one as you. For example you say below ...

>>>The MSH has been architected under the assumption that it has in its
possession information that enables it to do "(send or receive)transport,
(un-)packaging, and (application layer) routing" for a given sender/receiver
pair<<<

I would assert that with the current spec, the receiving MSH often will not
have the information needed as it assumes the sender of a message knows what
to put in there and sometimes they won't. I don't think it is acceptable
that before you send anyone a message you HAVE to pre-agree in a separate
out-of-band conversation what data is to be used in the service and action
for any response.

I tried to explain the problem in my original email as well as include a
suggested solution see ...

http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-msg/200109/msg00079.html

The only feedback so far is "I don't want anything else in the header"
whilst the problem I raised has not been discussed. I'd really appreciate it
if you would read the original email and:
1. Agree (or not) that there is a problem - and if not say why.
2. If you agree there is a problem suggest an alternative solution if you
don't like the one I have proposed.

I'd also like to repeat three questions from an earlier at
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-msg/200109/msg00115.html email to
which no-one has yet responded ...

"1. How does the recipient of a message know what to put in the Service and
Action for the message they return in the absence of a CPA (Please read the
Bank Payment example for more details)
2. To use RefToMessageId, the sender of a message, where a reply is
expected, would have no option but to save the data from the EVERY message
even though the message was sent with deliverySemantics of BestEffort. This
should not be necessary. How can it be avoided?
3. If you are using PartyId, Service and Action to route a message, how do
you know which MSH at the Party should receive the message when Service and
Action have fixed values (as in an error message)? With the current spec, a
Party could only have one MSH ... even if it were IBM."

A few more detailed comments below.

Regards

David