[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: MTF meeting invitation - Friday 11 am / 3 pm



Apologies, but I will not be able to make the meeting.

 

From: mtf@xxxxxxxx [mailto:mtf@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Brian Lynn
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 2:25 PM
To: mtf@xxxxxxxx
Subject: FW: MTF meeting invitation - Friday 11 am / 3 pm

 

 

Reminder ...

 

Next meeting will be this Friday (tomorrow) at 11 am (NY)/3pm (London).  (This is the last week for the UK time change)

 

US: 888 481 3032

Intl: 617 801 9600

UK: 0800 904 7961

 

Participant Code: 28413758

 

 

Agenda:

 

 

 Vote on options for corrections and cancellations.  Choices are:

1) – one message for all three actions (new/correct/cancel), some kind of action code to indicate which is required.

2) – two messages, one for new/correct, the other for cancel.

3) – three messages, one for new, one for correct, one for cancel (existing 4.x approach)

 

Vote on whether to accept the other recommendations, which include:

- correlate messages based on a unique business object identifier

- move to a single processing status message instead of separate messages for each failure reason

- consolidate messages so that one request type (e.g. “confirm this”) and set of responses can work on multiple business objects (e.g. trades, amendments, novations, etc.)

 

- Discuss Matthew’s proposal that unique trade identification be supported via validation rules, as described in the attached document (these are the validation rules that have been added for contract notification).  (I am particularly interested how this approach might work in a central service provider context when there are multiple trade IDs on a message).

- Continue discussion on other proposals for business object identification  (time permitting)

 

- AOB