Imported from previous forum
Do you foresee if FIXML and OFX (http://www.ofx.net) will evolve in their own direction or they will eventually merge as one industry standard?
Any thoughts? Ideas?
Serena Chan
Nesbitt Burns Inc.
Serena,
OFX and FIXML serve different niches of the financial services industry so are not likely to merge. OFX is used in retail and FIXML is for institutional trading.
Cheers,
Russell Galvin
Financial Models Company
>
> Do you foresee if FIXML and OFX (http://www.ofx.net) will evolve in their own direction or they will eventually merge as one industry standard?
>
> Any thoughts? Ideas?
>
> Serena Chan
> Nesbitt Burns Inc.
>
Serena,
I would say that OFX and FIXML would not merge at any business/functional level. More likely, however, FIXML will adopt some of the same underlying open standard techniques of OFX, since OFX was the industry’s first protocol to use SGML/XML over HTTPS.
David Panjada
Innovision Corporation
http://www.innovision.com
david.Panjada@innovision.com
> Do you foresee if FIXML and OFX (http://www.ofx.net) will evolve in their own direction or they will eventually merge as one industry standard?
>
> Any thoughts? Ideas?
>
> Serena Chan
> Nesbitt Burns Inc.
>
[ original email was from Ryan Pierce - rpierce@taltrade.com ]
> I would say that OFX and FIXML would not merge at any business/functional level. More likely, however, FIXML will adopt some of the same underlying open standard techniques of OFX, since OFX was the industry’s first protocol to use SGML/XML over HTTPS.
I am unfamiliar with how OFX operates over HTTPS.
One significant issue is that FIXML messages are completely void of any sequence number or session level retransmission messages. This, in my mind, is a very good thing because it allows easy integration with "Embedded FIXML" over existing FIX sessions, as well as the use of various vendor middleware solutions for reliable message passing. However, without sequence numbers, it seems there is a significant risk in just exchanging FIXML over, xay, a raw TCP socket. Should disconnects occur, one has no idea which messages the other side has or has not received.
How does OFX overcome this? Does OFX define its own sequence number and session layer within the message? Is there some form of glue between the OFX business messages and the HTTPS transport that allow for ordered delivery and retransmission?
[ original email was from Danny Shobrook - danny@aptcompsys.com ]
> > I would say that OFX and FIXML would not merge at any business/functional level. More likely, however, FIXML will adopt some of the same underlying open standard techniques of OFX, since OFX was the industry’s first protocol to use SGML/XML over HTTPS.
>
> I am unfamiliar with how OFX operates over HTTPS.
>
> One significant issue is that FIXML messages are completely void of any sequence number or session level retransmission messages. This, in my mind, is a very good thing because it allows easy integration with "Embedded FIXML" over existing FIX sessions, as well as the use of various vendor middleware solutions for reliable message passing. However, without sequence numbers, it seems there is a significant risk in just exchanging FIXML over, xay, a raw TCP socket. Should disconnects occur, one has no idea which messages the other side has or has not received.
Firstly, OFX is purely request response. So you request a statement and you get one back or an error, similiarly bank transfer or for securities a valuation of holding or quote.
This is obviously unsuitable to an asynchronous trading environment like the wholesale or even retail securities market.
Most of the XML work out there ignores the session level issues and focuses - rightly - on data. All this is fine if you have total control over your environment - ie middleware from one piece to another but if like in the FIX world you do not necessarily have a close relationship with your counterparties technology supplier you still need something like FIX’s session level to guarantee you can actually talk to each other.
I would disagree that technologically OFX brings anything to the table. What is does bring is alot of work on valuations and holdings data requirements which FIX currently lacks.
[ original email was from Dwight Arthur - darthur@dtcc.com ]
First, it’s my understanding that the OFX work has been absorbed into a successor protocol, ifx (www.ifxforum.org) which is a familiar sort of definition of how certain business transactions can be expressed as XML, with the objective of transport-layer transparency.
As others have noted, IFX following OFX does not seem well suited to mass quotes, securities trading, allocation and settlement messages, etc. It does, however, imho a better job than anything else at inquiring as to the content and value of an existing portfolio, reconciling the records two different parties have of the same portfolio, reporting on pending as well as completed transactions that may have affected the portfolio, etc.
It may be that many or most applications can make do with one or the other of these bits of functionality but there will be those who will need both, and they would benefit from consistency or even interoperability between the two. An example in that in Mutual Funds, the ability to take and receive an order creates an immediate demand for a portfolio inquiry/download. With some financial services firms now taking leadership positions in both FIX and IFX it’s hard for me to imagine either will avoid feeling pressure to interoperate. What’s especially great in this case 
is that the existing acronym need only be scrambled - no new or leftover letters. -Dwight
> > > I would say that OFX and FIXML would not merge at any business/functional level. More likely, however, FIXML will adopt some of the same underlying open standard techniques of OFX,<. . .>
> Firstly, OFX is purely request response. So you request a statement and you get one back or an error, similiarly bank transfer or for securities a valuation of holding or quote.
>
> This is obviously unsuitable to an asynchronous trading environment like the wholesale or even retail securities market.
>
> Most of the XML work out there ignores the session level issues and focuses - rightly - on data. All this is fine if you have total control over your environment - ie middleware from one piece to another but if like in the FIX world you do not necessarily have a close relationship with your counterparties technology supplier you still need something like FIX’s session level to guarantee you can actually talk to each other.
>
> I would disagree that technologically OFX brings anything to the table. What is does bring is alot of work on valuations and holdings data requirements which FIX currently lacks.
>
[ original email was from shiva prasad - sp_nayak@hotmail.com ]
Good Thinking
I think so
i fear that it may go and become commercialized soon
shiva
>
> Do you foresee if FIXML and OFX (http://www.ofx.net) will evolve in their own direction or they will eventually merge as one industry standard?
>
> Any thoughts? Ideas?
>
> Serena Chan
> Nesbitt Burns Inc.
>