Jacques,
Regarding CPA values below. Is it the assumption that both
parties have the same configuration?
If so, I think this is fine.
Also, I provide more comments regarding the scripted test
cases.
Thanks,
Mike
At 04:40 PM 1/13/2003 -0800, Jacques Durand wrote:
Mike:
- my response to your comments
attached (see three first test cases moslty)
No major issue.
- I gave a shot at the CPAs
subset needed for the 10 interop test cases (here described in a very
abstract way,
reusing some format we had in
TestFramework). Probably need be more precise. It seems that we need
six...
(very little variation from one
to the other). Comments?
regards,
Jacques
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1)
urn:config:cpa_basic (default) (for test
cases 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4)<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office"
/>
<JD> Name changed for
consistency with the test case scripting from Mike.?
Transport:
Protocol
HTTP
1.1
SyncReplyMode:
None
Reliability:
Retry/Timeout
Receipt
Acknowledgement:
Not
required
Response:
Not required
Response
Acknowledgement:
Not
required (do we need this line? It is more business level, not MSH)
Duplicate Check
:
None
Order:
No
Security:
Encryption:
No
Signature:
No
Non-Repudiation
Origin
Not
required
Receipt
Not
required
Multi
Hop:
No
Error:
ErrrorURI:
<URI of driver party>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
(2) Urn:config:cpa_basic_signed (for test
cases 1.5, 1.6)
Transport:
Protocol
HTTP
1.1
SyncReplyMode:
None
Reliability:
Retry/Timeout
Receipt
Acknowledgement:
Not
required
Response:
Not required
Response
Acknowledgement:
Not
required
Duplicate Check
:
None
Order:
No
Security:
Encryption:
No
Signature:
Yes
Non-Repudiation
Origin
Not
required
Receipt
Not
required
Multi
Hop:
No
Error:
ErrrorURI:
<URI of driver party>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
(3) Urn:config:cpa_basic_syncresponse (for
test cases 1.7)
Transport:
Protocol
HTTP
1.1
SyncReplyMode:
signalsAndResponse
Reliability:
Retry/Timeout
Receipt
Acknowledgement:
Not
required
Response:
Not required
Response
Acknowledgement:
Not
required
Duplicate Check
:
None
Order:
No
Security:
Encryption:
No
Signature:
No
Non-Repudiation
Origin
Not
required
Receipt
Not
required
Multi
Hop:
No
Error:
ErrrorURI:
<URI of driver party>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
(4) Urn:config:cpa_basic_reliable (for test
cases 1.8)
Transport:
Protocol
HTTP
1.1
SyncReplyMode:
None
Reliability:
Retry/Timeout
Receipt
Acknowledgement:
Yes
Response:
Not required
Response
Acknowledgement:
Not
required
Duplicate Check
:
None
Order:
No
Security:
Encryption:
No
Signature:
No
Non-Repudiation
Origin
Not
required
Receipt
Not
required
Multi
Hop:
No
Error:
ErrrorURI:
<URI of driver party>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5) Urn:config:cpa_basic_reliablesig (for
test cases 1.9)
Transport:
Protocol
HTTP
1.1
SyncReplyMode:
None
Reliability:
Retry/Timeout
Receipt
Acknowledgement:
Yes
Response:
Not required
Response
Acknowledgement:
Not
required
Duplicate Check
:
None
Order:
No
Security:
Encryption:
No
Signature:
Yes
Non-Repudiation
Origin
Not
required
Receipt
Yes
(is that what will get the Ack signed?)
Multi
Hop:
No
Error:
ErrrorURI:
<URI of driver party>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
(6) Urn:config:cpa_basic_reliablesync (for
test cases 1.10)
Transport:
Protocol
HTTP
1.1
SyncReplyMode:
mshSignalsOnly
Reliability:
Retry/Timeout
Receipt
Acknowledgement:
Yes
Response:
Not required
Response
Acknowledgement:
Not
required
Duplicate Check
:
None
Order:
No
Security:
Encryption:
No
Signature:
No
Non-Repudiation
Origin
Not
required
Receipt
Not
required
Multi
Hop:
No
Error:
ErrrorURI:
<URI of driver party>
-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Kass
[mailto:]
Sent: Monday, January 13, 2003 12:32 PM
To: Jacques Durand; ''
Cc: ''
Subject: Re: FW: [ebxml-iic-interop] comments on Interop
suite
Jacques and all,
Here are my comments to your comments regarding Interop Test
Scripting.
( Comments preceded by [MIKE] )
Cheers,
Mike
At 06:13 PM 1/7/2003 -0800, Jacques Durand wrote:
Mike, Monica, Matt:
Not sure if you are on the iic-interop list, so resending to you just in case...
Jacques
-----Original Message-----
From: Jacques Durand [mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, January 07, 2003 12:25 PM
To: ''
Subject: [ebxml-iic-interop] comments on Interop suite
Hello:
Here is a few more comments (I also consolidated a few from Monica) on the Interop spec, for Steve.
Also, comments on the test case scripting from Mike (I cast his HTML doc in a Word doc, for
ease of updates.) A few generic comments for now (that apply probably to most test cases.)
Still needs more detailed review. Most of them hinge on the fact that in Interop test,
we don't control much the details of message envelope, as we stay above MSH level.
Cheers,
<<BIP_testsuite.zip>>
Attachment:
BIP_testcases_scripting_MK_JD_MK.doc
Description: MS-Word document
