Actually I shouldn't have used the word forwarding as it
implies pushing and I too prefer polling/pulling.
So if a CAP message meets the CAP schema but not a known
profile it is not processed further and not made available. Good to
know.
All I ask is that any reporting of failure distinguishes
CAP schema failure from profile failures.
Other than that, it was just a soapbox moment that I took.
Thanks
From: Gary Ham [mailto:]
Sent: March 9, 2010 4:24 PM
To: Paulsen,Norm
[Ontario]
Cc: McGarry, Donald P.; David RR Webber (XML);
; Dwarkanath,Sukumar - INTL
Subject: Re:
[emergency] HAVE Conformance vs. Documentation vs. Released
Schemas
I think you misunderstand,
IPAWS-OPEN will take any valid CAP message as long as the sender is
authorized, and make it retrievable by any who are authorized to retrieve. The
retriever can then determine if the message is useful on their net or not.
But pushes are another matter. Before DM-OPEN pushes out a message it has
received for re-transport (e.g., NWEMs to the NWS, and perhaps Canadian
profile message???) it will test against whatever profile the receiver requires,
and will not process further if it does not meet the profile. That is why
pushes are a pain, and why we will have to negotiate each push arrangement
separately and have a formal agreement with the system we push to. Pulls
are a lot less of a problem for us because the pulling system can deal with the
issues.
Gary
On Mar 9, 2010, at 4:14 PM, Paulsen,Norm [Ontario] wrote:
Thanks
Not quite sure exactly what you mean by structure, but it
sounds like it will not accept anything that doesn't have elements with values
specific to these concerns. This contradicts the line that says takes any valid CAP
message.
However, I have no problem with IPAWS-OPEN doing
that at all. I also no problem with IPAWS-OPEN requiring my
Canadian Structure before accepting my CAP and forwarding.
What I need to stress is that if indeed it is only open
to these "structures" then it can't be truly said to be accepting any valid CAP message. It
can though be said to be accepting of any CAP IPAWS
message (if indeed those structures are defined in IPAWS).
Thanks
Norm
From: Gary Ham [mailto:]
Sent: March 9, 2010 3:52 PM
To: Paulsen,Norm
[Ontario]
Cc: McGarry, Donald P.; David RR Webber (XML); ;
Dwarkanath,Sukumar - INTL
Subject: *****SPAM***** Re: [emergency]
HAVE Conformance vs. Documentation vs. Released Schemas
I cannot speak details for IPAWS specifically, because not all
aspects have been built or even designed, but I can give some general
direction. IPAWS-OPEN (yep 3.0 will be called IPAWS-OPEN) is planned to have a
single CAP input interface that takes any valid CAP message. Depending
on content (does it have the appropriate CMAS structures, EAS structures, NWEM
structures, etc), user permissions, and user direction, it will be made
available to multiple other networks, gateways, interoperating systems, push
capabilities, etc., as applicable. Data driven, as simple as possible,
as complex as necessary. That is the goal.
R/s
Gary
Gary Ham
http://grandpaham.com
703-899-6241
