RE: [ebxml-msg] 2.4.5 suggested edits

Fine with me to add that. 

 

From: Jacques R.
Durand [mailto:] 

Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009
7:44 PM

To: Moberg
 Dale; 

Subject: RE: [ebxml-msg] 2.4.5
suggested edits

 

If  RoutingInput WSA reference
parameter is to be used for routing, then only these need be targeted to nextMSH . In
that case, if the ultimate receiver cannot act in this role, we should probably
recommend using RoutingInput ...

 

...If the ultimate receiving endpoint is unable to act in the nextMSH role, the sending endpoint SHOULD
target eb3:Messaging headers to
the default ultimateReceiver
role, and SHOULD make use of the WSA
reference parameter RoutingInput targeted to nextMSH
role for the routing information.

 

jacques

From: Moberg Dale [mailto:] 

Sent: Wednesday, September 09,
2009 12:59 PM

To: 

Subject: [ebxml-msg] 2.4.5
suggested edits

[Added
some commas and made referential terms a bit more explicit.]

 

Because
ebMS intermediaries do not change the ebMS messages they route, the eb3:Messaging
header can be targeted to the nextMSH
when received by the ultimate endpoint. Therefore, the ultimate receiving
endpoint SHOULD also act in the nextMSH
role. If the ultimate receiving endpoint is unable to act in the nextMSH role, the sending endpoint SHOULD
target eb3:Messaging headers to
the default ultimateReceiver
role.