Imported from previous forum
[ original email was from Jim Northey - jnorthey@jandj.com ]
Is the general consensus that the FAST 1.0 specifies / includes full multiple level nesting of groups including repeating groups?
This is a very relevant question.
I don’t think so. The issue hasn’t been discussed in detail.
The spec doesn’t contain a complete treatise of the subject.
The POC project implemented one level of nesting within messages
to handle MD repeating groups.
We’ve implemented full multi-level nesting at Pantor for the
FAST Tunnel, but I expect that we’ll need to update our impl
to track the standard as the standard matures.
Dave, Greg, Wei, it would be interesting to hear what you guys
at TransactTools, Cameron, and Nyfix respectively are aiming for?
Is the general consensus that the FAST 1.0 specifies / includes
full multiple level nesting of groups including repeating groups?
[ original email was from Jim Northey - jnorthey@jandj.com ]
Rolf - this is the way we interpreted the specification as well- that it does not state the levels of nesting explicitly. From a specification process - as FAST 1.0 is already released - it seems like we have to clarify FAST 1.0 and indicate that the 1.0 specification is silent on this point. We can then as part of MDOWG work discern a direction and once that consensus is achieved we can revise the FAST 1.0 documentation to say the “intent is to provide this capability in a later version of FAST”. I think it is valuable to include intent and some forward pointers (assuming we have achieved consensus) to help implementers.
From our perspective - I think we would want to fast track this (no pun intended) - I guess that is inappropriate - our opinion is that this should be a priority - don’t know all the other priorities so can’t offer an opinion on ranking along side the other work that needs to be done.
This is a very relevant question.
I don’t think so. The issue hasn’t been discussed in detail.
The spec doesn’t contain a complete treatise of the subject.
The POC project implemented one level of nesting within messages to
handle MD repeating groups.We’ve implemented full multi-level nesting at Pantor for the FAST
Tunnel, but I expect that we’ll need to update our impl to track the
standard as the standard matures.Dave, Greg, Wei, it would be interesting to hear what you guys at
TransactTools, Cameron, and Nyfix respectively are aiming for?Is the general consensus that the FAST 1.0 specifies / includes full
multiple level nesting of groups including repeating groups?
[ original email was from Wei Koek - Wei.Koek@nyfix.com ]
Although the TE spec doesn’t or hasn’t address the multi-level nesting of repeating group in detail, the implementation at NYFIX provides fulll support of multi-level nesting of repeating group.
wk
This is a very relevant question.
I don’t think so. The issue hasn’t been discussed in detail.
The spec doesn’t contain a complete treatise of the subject.
The POC project implemented one level of nesting within messages to
handle MD repeating groups.We’ve implemented full multi-level nesting at Pantor for the FAST
Tunnel, but I expect that we’ll need to update our impl to track the
standard as the standard matures.Dave, Greg, Wei, it would be interesting to hear what you guys at
TransactTools, Cameron, and Nyfix respectively are aiming for?Is the general consensus that the FAST 1.0 specifies / includes full
multiple level nesting of groups including repeating groups?
[ original email was from Jim Northey - jnorthey@jandj.com ]
Sounds like the consensus is that nested repeating groups are a part of FAST 1.0
Although the TE spec doesn’t or hasn’t address the multi-level nesting
of repeating group in detail, the implementation at NYFIX provides fulll
support of multi-level nesting of repeating group.wk
This is a very relevant question.
I don’t think so. The issue hasn’t been discussed in detail.
The spec doesn’t contain a complete treatise of the subject.
The POC project implemented one level of nesting within messages to
handle MD repeating groups.We’ve implemented full multi-level nesting at Pantor for the FAST
Tunnel, but I expect that we’ll need to update our impl to track the
standard as the standard matures.Dave, Greg, Wei, it would be interesting to hear what you guys at
TransactTools, Cameron, and Nyfix respectively are aiming for?Is the general consensus that the FAST 1.0 specifies / includes full
multiple level nesting of groups including repeating groups?