Imported from previous forum
I am just after some clarification as there seems to be a bit of a grey area on Rejections.
I understand that a 39=8 (OrderStatus=Rejected) can be sent back to the client after an new order single has been acked (39=0 OrderStatus=New). I assume this could occur when a downstream system is not able to take the order and therefore sends back a reject after the order has been acked.
I would like to know however if it is possible as per FIX spec to send back 39=8 (Rejected) an a new order single that has been acked and then ammended.
IE: The order is in a 39=5 (OrderStatus=Replaced) and then the following message is a 39=8 (OrderStatus=Rejected) is sent on that order.
Can someone confirm if
a) This should be a possible workflow or should an unsolicited cancel be sent in this situation.
b) If 39=8 was sent after an order was amended, How you expect this to be handled by the client IE: should the amendment be rejected or should the order be rejected and closed.
Any help would be appreciated.
Michael
Hi Michael,
just read this posting. This is an interesting scenario (similiar to the delayed reject of an order acked by ER(NEW).
So you send an Amend (Replaced) which is first acked (Status changes to REPLACED) and later rejected by a down-stream system.
Normally, I would use PENDING_REPLACE and either REPLACED or OrderCancelReject in this situation. The FIX specification lacks any scenario were a REJECTED is sent after the REPLACED. I did not find any occurrence in the FIX 5.0SP2 vol 4.
From my experience most customer side systems have problems processing a REJECT after a NEW.
So my recommendation would be to also avoid this for the replace scenario.
Did you have any new findings meanwhile?
Cheers, Jörg
I am just after some clarification as there seems to be a bit of a grey area on Rejections.
I understand that a 39=8 (OrderStatus=Rejected) can be sent back to the client after an new order single has been acked (39=0 OrderStatus=New). I assume this could occur when a downstream system is not able to take the order and therefore sends back a reject after the order has been acked.
I would like to know however if it is possible as per FIX spec to send back 39=8 (Rejected) an a new order single that has been acked and then ammended.
IE: The order is in a 39=5 (OrderStatus=Replaced) and then the following message is a 39=8 (OrderStatus=Rejected) is sent on that order.
Can someone confirm if
a) This should be a possible workflow or should an unsolicited cancel be sent in this situation.
b) If 39=8 was sent after an order was amended, How you expect this to be handled by the client IE: should the amendment be rejected or should the order be rejected and closed.Any help would be appreciated.
Michael
If an order has already been acknowledged, I think the only way to reject it is to send an unsolicited cancel. ExecRestatementReason can be used to communicate the cancel reason.
But I agree with you, Jörg, in the concerned scenario, a pending exec followed by a ack or a reject would be better if possible.
Regards,
Xavier.
Hi Michael,
just read this posting. This is an interesting scenario (similiar to the delayed reject of an order acked by ER(NEW).
So you send an Amend (Replaced) which is first acked (Status changes to REPLACED) and later rejected by a down-stream system.
Normally, I would use PENDING_REPLACE and either REPLACED or OrderCancelReject in this situation. The FIX specification lacks any scenario were a REJECTED is sent after the REPLACED. I did not find any occurrence in the FIX 5.0SP2 vol 4.
From my experience most customer side systems have problems processing a REJECT after a NEW.
So my recommendation would be to also avoid this for the replace scenario.Did you have any new findings meanwhile?
Cheers, Jörg
I am just after some clarification as there seems to be a bit of a grey area on Rejections.
I understand that a 39=8 (OrderStatus=Rejected) can be sent back to the client after an new order single has been acked (39=0 OrderStatus=New). I assume this could occur when a downstream system is not able to take the order and therefore sends back a reject after the order has been acked.
I would like to know however if it is possible as per FIX spec to send back 39=8 (Rejected) an a new order single that has been acked and then ammended.
IE: The order is in a 39=5 (OrderStatus=Replaced) and then the following message is a 39=8 (OrderStatus=Rejected) is sent on that order.
Can someone confirm if
a) This should be a possible workflow or should an unsolicited cancel be sent in this situation.
b) If 39=8 was sent after an order was amended, How you expect this to be handled by the client IE: should the amendment be rejected or should the order be rejected and closed.Any help would be appreciated.
Michael