[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: AS#2 Transport Protocol/Security
- To: "ietf-ediint@xxxxxxx" <ietf-ediint@xxxxxxx> (Return requested), "Y. John Jiang" <yjj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Return requested)
- Subject: RE: AS#2 Transport Protocol/Security
- From: "Egerter, Chuck" <Chuck.Egerter@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 30 Sep 1996 10:06:23 -0600
- Alternate-recipient: Allowed
- Conversion: Allowed
- Disclose-recipients: Prohibited
- Original-encoded-information-types: IA5-Text
- Priority: normal
- Sender: owner-ietf-ediint@xxxxxxx
- X400-content-type: P2-1988 ( 22 )
- X400-mts-identifier: [/c=us/admd=telemail/prmd=mmc/; 06953324FEFFF0FA-lmagMTA]
- X400-originator: Chuck.Egerter@den.mmc.com
- X400-received: by /c=us/admd=telemail/prmd=mmc/; converted ( IA5-Text); Relayed; 30 Sep 1996 10:06:23 -0600
- X400-received: by mta lmagMTA in /c=us/admd=telemail/prmd=mmc/; converted ( IA5-Text); Relayed; 30 Sep 1996 10:06:23 -0600
- X400-recipients: non-disclosure;
Although, David may know of some companies doing that, I could not
image my company (Lockheed Martin) doing this any time in the near
future. As a Defense/Aerospace company, we have too many compliance
contraints placed on us to use a broker in that way. We need to be
very careful who we buy from, who manufactured it, how many people and
who we sent RFQs to and why, who we awarded to and why, etc. All of
this (and more) need to be carefully documented and auditable. I do
not like the idea of letting a broker handle that for me. There are
too many things to take into consideration, and we have too much at
stake. Additionally, I don't think a broker adds much value to my
process. Our sourcing groups are centralized, and in essence are
already brokers to the overall company.
The real application of EDI via the internet for me is the ability to
do a better, cheaper, faster job of getting material into my plant.
EDI helps me do this, but not all of my suppliers can justify
traditional EDI. They are too small, or just don't do enough business
with us or other EDI customers to get a payback. The internet can
change all that, it can help me achieve our 5 year goal of getting
100% of our supplier base trading with us electronically.
We are also interested in how our suppliers are using the data that we
send back and forth. Ideally, we would like their internal systems
(Order Entry, MRP, etc. ) to interface with their EDI system.
Currently, we know many of our EDI suppliers end up printing the EDI
document out, and re-typing it into some legacy system. I would like
to see EDI via the internet provide some way to make interfacing with
internal systems easier.
I don't disagree with GET functionality, I just want to be clear on
what we think the application might be before we define it as a must.
What if any, are the risks and problems with adding this functionality
to our requirements?
Thanks for the opportunity to listen, learn, and hopefully add a
EC - Advanced Sourcing, Electronics Sector