RE: EDI and MDN

[Rik Drummond <drummond@xxxxxxxxxx>]

These were felt to be trading partner specific at this time and because of 
that "may" was used in place of must. The same is true of the "processed" 
status. It is a trading partner issues at this time.... the definition 
being left up to the trading partners...... Regards, Rik

-----Original Message-----
From:	rsr [SMTP:maddouri@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent:	Tuesday, February 24, 1998 12:09 PM
To:	ietf-ediint@xxxxxxx
Subject:	EDI and MDN

hello,

I. For EDI exchanges, what does it mean when a sender station receives
an MDN with a disposition-type field="processed".

1. the recipient UA has delivered the EDI interchange to a translator to
be processed or

2. the translator has processed successfuly the EDI interchange
received.

II. In the case of forwarding the EDI message, I think that that page 3
of draft [fajman 97] is not enough specific
" however, if a message is forwarded, a "dispatched" MDN may been issued
for the recipient doing the forwarding and the recipient of the
forwarded message may also cause an MDN to be generated"

Don't you think, that for EDI, we need to replace "may" by "must"?

Lamia Ben Azzouz
Tunisia school of informatics