Imported from previous forum
All,
please post you comments to draft 4 either here or via e-mail to:
david.rosenborg@pantor.com
You can find the draft doc at:
http://www.fixprotocol.org/documents/3533/FAST%20Session%20Control%20Protocol%201%201%2004.doc
The current draft will be discussed at the next mdowg confcall, Aug 15.
Thx,
Rolf
[ original email was from Darshan Khedekar - darshan.khedekar.ext@deutsche-boerse.com ]
Hi
I understand from this bit in appendix 2.3 in template defns that you plan to use TID=121 as a FAST Reset TID as against 120 used in FAST SCP 1.0. I did not understand the rationale behind this change?
Regards,
Darshan
All,
please post you comments to draft 4 either here or via e-mail to:
david.rosenborg@pantor.comYou can find the draft doc at: http://www.fixprotocol.org/documents/353-
3/FAST%20Session%20Control%20Protocol%201%201%2004.docThe current draft will be discussed at the next mdowg confcall, Aug 15.
Thx, Rolf
I think it is a very good question. The original rationale was that the TID should reflect the version of SCP that was used. However, I think this property is really only needed on the Hello message.
A probably better rule of thumb would be that if a template other than Hello is structurally identical to a template from a previous version of SCP, the TID should remain the same.
If no one objects, I’ll change the draft to use 120 for Reset.
/David
Hi
I understand from this bit in appendix 2.3 in template defns that you
plan to use TID=121 as a FAST Reset TID as against 120 used in FAST SCP
1.0. I did not understand the rationale behind this change?
Regards, Darshan
All,
please post you comments to draft 4 either here or via e-mail to:
david.rosenborg@pantor.comYou can find the draft doc at: http://www.fixprotocol.org/documents/353-
3/FAST%20Session%20Control%20Protocol%201%201%2004.docThe current draft will be discussed at the next mdowg confcall, Aug
15.Thx, Rolf