[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: General Observations
>Date: Mon, 19 Feb 96 10:52:20 MET
>From: NAD+FR+EDI ENGINEERING:"PSE:DEC+GRAHAM HELLIAR:830-3173++REO2-F/D2'"
>In particular, the Interchange Control Number (ICN) debate. In particular, the
>ICN's location is standards specific, and not just in EDIFACT and X12, so the
>EDI-CONSENT type needs to know about it as well. The value is within the
>Interchange content, so if encryption is applied 'above' the edi interchange
>level then how can you get at it.
>As a number of mails have pointed out there are no rules as to how the ICN is
>populated, and I have come across 19 different ways they have been implemented,
>whilst some are just duplication across standards, I'm sure this is just the tip
>of the iceberg.
>I think ICN checking, whilst a valid user requirement is best left to the 'value
>added' of the VAN's and the features of the various EDI Translators. It does not
>stop people doing 'EDI over the Internet' any more than it stops them doing EDI
I have to agree with Graham.
I think this project is so far off the rails now, it is useless
proceeding any further.
Please unsubscribe me.
The University of Melbourne
Department of Computer Science