Electronic Data Interchange-Internet Integration (ediint)

Dorian.Selz | 12 Jan 1998 23:04

Picon

IJEM: Special Issue on Electronic Auctions (Vol.7 - No.4)

Apologies for cross-posting; please pass on to interested
colleagues and distribute to relevant lists.
_________________________________________________________

Dear Colleagues,

What is the rational behind auctions and what are the motives to
set-up electronic auctions on the Web, asks our Guest Editor Stefan
Klein, University of Muenster, Germany. He put together a special
issue (Vol.7 - No.4 / Winter '97/98) with highlights such as:

- AUCNET: Electronic Intermediary for Used-Car Transactions,
  by Ho Geun Lee, Yonsei University, Korea

- Auctions and Bidding on the Internet: An Assessment, by Efraim
  Turban, California State University Long Beach

- Experiences with  Electronic Auctions in the Dutch Flower
  Industry, by Eric van Heck, Erasmus University Rotterdam, The and
  Pieter M. Ribbers, Tilburg University, The Netherlands

Find the Table of Content below. The journal may be downloaded from
our Website (http://www.electronicmarkets.org). Please write to the
editor for hard copies (em.editors <at> netacademy.org).

The coming issues will deal with "Transactions in Electronic Markets"
(Spring Issue) and "Electronic Commerce in Europe" (Summer Issue).
See our Call for Papers at our Website
(http://www.electronicmarkets.org).

(Continue reading)

Rik Drummond | 21 Jan 1998 16:49

FW: EDIINT WG Minutes for the IETF Dec 98 Meeting

-----Original Message-----
From:	Rik Drummond [SMTP:drummond <at> onramp.net]
Sent:	Tuesday, January 20, 1998 2:39 PM
To:	cclark <at> ns.ietf.org
Subject:	EDIINT WG Minutes for the IETF Dec 98 Meeting

Minutes from the EDIINT WG Session at the IETF December 1997 Meeting

Rik Drummond, WG Chair, and Dale Moberg, Editor for the Secure EDI over 
HTTP Applicability Statement Draft, made presentations during the meeting.

Rik Drummond welcomed everyone and reviewed the WG status. Approximately 
20% of the 30 attendees had read the three WG Drafts.  We will submit the 
first two drafts to the Experimental RFC track as a holding action until 
the S/MIME issue is resolved one way or the other, since both drafts 
reference S/MIME.  There are three Internet Drafts now available.  A 
fourth, specific to the healthcare industry (HL7), is expected in January. 
The current drafts are: Requirements, Applicability Statement for Secure 
EDI over SMTP, and Applicability Statement for Secure EDI over HTTP.

Rik noted that Microsoft Exchange is still causing problems because or the 
way MIME / MAPI translations take place. It is not know if Exchange version 
5.5 fixes the problem.

Dale Moberg presented the status of the Secure EDI over HTTP Draft.  It 
follows closely the SMTP Draft, making only changes necessary to convert 
the SMTP-based recommendations to the HTTP protocol.  Dale noted that one 
of the problems he found in a test implementation of Secure EDI over HTTP 
is that the servers timeout if the response takes to long. Einar Stefferud

(Continue reading)

Werner, James K | 21 Jan 1998 20:25

Picon

RE: EDIINT WG Minutes fo the IETF Dec 98 Meeting

imho, the "possible" need to timestamp EDI "transactions" is a complete
misstatement: timestamping is an *absolute* repeat *ABSOLUTE* (volume
added for emphasis) requirment - no waffling, no qualifications, no
'divide and conquer' strategies - timestamping is a must!.  

James K. Werner
The Boeing Company
PO Box 3707, #MS 6C-FH
Seattle, Wa. 98124-2207
phone: (425)237-6274  fax: (425)237-8510
email: james.werner <at> pss.boeing.com

Rik Drummond | 21 Jan 1998 21:52

RE: EDIINT WG Minutes fo the IETF Dec 98 Meeting

Then get involved and make it happen. How do you see this happening?  What would the process be and who would be involved?

Regards, Rik

-----Original Message-----
From:	Werner, James K [SMTP:James.Werner <at> PSS.Boeing.com]
Sent:	Wednesday, January 21, 1998 1:25 PM
To:	'ietf-ediint <at> imc.org'
Subject:	RE: EDIINT WG Minutes fo the IETF Dec 98 Meeting

imho, the "possible" need to timestamp EDI "transactions" is a complete
misstatement: timestamping is an *absolute* repeat *ABSOLUTE* (volume
added for emphasis) requirment - no waffling, no qualifications, no
'divide and conquer' strategies - timestamping is a must!.  

James K. Werner
The Boeing Company
PO Box 3707, #MS 6C-FH
Seattle, Wa. 98124-2207
phone: (425)237-6274  fax: (425)237-8510
email: james.werner <at> pss.boeing.com

Marc Blanchet | 22 Jan 1998 00:21

Picon

Timestamping

In the PKIX group, there is a draft on time stamping. 
(ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pkix-ipki5tsp-00.txt)
I was involved in the early work on it. This draft can give at least some
thoughts.  I would be interested in participating in the effort.

Regards, Marc.

>Then get involved and make it happen. How do you see this happening?  What
would the process be and who would be involved?
>
>Regards, Rik
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From:	Werner, James K [SMTP:James.Werner <at> PSS.Boeing.com]
>Sent:	Wednesday, January 21, 1998 1:25 PM
>To:	'ietf-ediint <at> imc.org'
>Subject:	RE: EDIINT WG Minutes fo the IETF Dec 98 Meeting
>
>imho, the "possible" need to timestamp EDI "transactions" is a complete
>misstatement: timestamping is an *absolute* repeat *ABSOLUTE* (volume
>added for emphasis) requirment - no waffling, no qualifications, no
>'divide and conquer' strategies - timestamping is a must!.  
>
>
>James K. Werner
>The Boeing Company
>PO Box 3707, #MS 6C-FH
>Seattle, Wa. 98124-2207
>phone: (425)237-6274  fax: (425)237-8510
>email: james.werner <at> pss.boeing.com

(Continue reading)

J. David MacDonald | 22 Jan 1998 02:25

Re: the "possible" need to timestamp EDI transactions

My first contribution to this group.

I think what we're talking about here a method to independently verify that
an EDI document was created on a certain date.

This would be well suited to a time-stamping service.  For instance, I use
Verisign's time-stamping service along with authenticode technology to sign
and date the executables that I distrubute.  What it really means is that
when I timestamp the executable and distribute it, I no longer have the
option to go back, change something, back-date my computer and sign it again
because the timestamp is supplied by Verisign, not by me. Changing anything
would invalidate the timestamp.  This keeps me honest!

The same thing applies to an EDI transactions.  We want an independent
source to verify that the document was in a certain state at a specific
time.

I can think of other situations as well.  If I'm late filing my B3
accounting documents to Customs, I will be fined even if they're
electronically lost or delayed by a 3rd party such as a VAN or ISP.  This
situation might change is I can prove that the document was prepared on a
certain date and timestamped by an independent 3rd party.

Of course, this brings up the subject of a reliable time-stamping service
capable of handling EDIINT type messages. None come to mind.

I guess the long and short of it is:  We need a place in the EDIINT
structure that can accomodate independent timestamps supplied by 3rd
parties.

(Continue reading)

Rik Drummond | 22 Jan 1998 15:56

RE: Timestamping

Thanks Marc...... I assume the reason for time-stamping is "non-repudiation of submission" and other
reasons. Correct?

Regards, Rik

-----Original Message-----
From:	Marc Blanchet [SMTP:Marc.Blanchet <at> viagenie.qc.ca]
Sent:	Wednesday, January 21, 1998 5:21 PM
To:	Rik Drummond; 'Werner, James K'; 'ietf-ediint <at> imc.org'
Subject:	Timestamping

In the PKIX group, there is a draft on time stamping. 
(ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pkix-ipki5tsp-00.txt)
I was involved in the early work on it. This draft can give at least some
thoughts.  I would be interested in participating in the effort.

Regards, Marc.

>Then get involved and make it happen. How do you see this happening?  What
would the process be and who would be involved?
>
>Regards, Rik
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From:	Werner, James K [SMTP:James.Werner <at> PSS.Boeing.com]
>Sent:	Wednesday, January 21, 1998 1:25 PM
>To:	'ietf-ediint <at> imc.org'
>Subject:	RE: EDIINT WG Minutes fo the IETF Dec 98 Meeting
>
>imho, the "possible" need to timestamp EDI "transactions" is a complete

(Continue reading)

Charles Bell | 22 Jan 1998 17:03

RE: the "possible" need to timestamp EDI transactions

<lurk-off>
check out www.surety.com, interesting approach to the digital notary 
service.  also, the us. postal service is rumored to be doing something 
here, but I haven't had time to check it out.
<lurk-on>

Best Regards,

Charlie Bell
Server Technologies Group, Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From:	J. David MacDonald [SMTP:davemac <at> ottawa.com]
Sent:	Wednesday, January 21, 1998 6:44 PM
To:	ietf-ediint <at> imc.org
Subject:	Re: the "possible" need to timestamp EDI transactions

My first contribution to this group.

I think what we're talking about here a method to independently verify that
an EDI document was created on a certain date.

This would be well suited to a time-stamping service.  For instance, I use
Verisign's time-stamping service along with authenticode technology to sign
and date the executables that I distrubute.  What it really means is that
when I timestamp the executable and distribute it, I no longer have the
option to go back, change something, back-date my computer and sign it 
again
because the timestamp is supplied by Verisign, not by me. Changing anything
would invalidate the timestamp.  This keeps me honest!

(Continue reading)

Dave Darnell | 22 Jan 1998 17:35

Re: the "possible" need to timestamp EDI transactions

I agree - good points made here by Dave MacDonald and others. 

IMHO - We need time-stamping in the EDIINT RFC. 

Regards,
Dave

At 08:25 PM 1/21/98 -0500, J. David MacDonald wrote:
>My first contribution to this group.
>
>I think what we're talking about here a method to independently verify that
>an EDI document was created on a certain date.
>
>This would be well suited to a time-stamping service.  For instance, I use
>Verisign's time-stamping service along with authenticode technology to sign
>and date the executables that I distrubute.  What it really means is that
>when I timestamp the executable and distribute it, I no longer have the
>option to go back, change something, back-date my computer and sign it again
>because the timestamp is supplied by Verisign, not by me. Changing anything
>would invalidate the timestamp.  This keeps me honest!
>
>The same thing applies to an EDI transactions.  We want an independent
>source to verify that the document was in a certain state at a specific
>time.
>
>I can think of other situations as well.  If I'm late filing my B3
>accounting documents to Customs, I will be fined even if they're
>electronically lost or delayed by a 3rd party such as a VAN or ISP.  This
>situation might change is I can prove that the document was prepared on a
>certain date and timestamped by an independent 3rd party.

(Continue reading)

Peter Yeatrakas | 22 Jan 1998 18:00

Re: Timestamping

>From my point of view (non technical), it is just a sound business
(best) practice, especially if there are any disagreements between
trading partners.  In the Automated Clearing House, the financial
community depends on something called settlement date (contained in the
file format), which while 24 hours long, is the key to when funds are
transfered, the key to the deadlines for submitting adjustments, and
tied to the obligations of the FI to it's customer, whether consumer or
corporate.  That date is MANDATORY, and similar to  Marc's ABSOLUTE
notion.  Financial institutions repackage EDI information along with the
funds transfer, so you can see that in the ACH world, the notion of
timestamping is absolutely critical.
Best regards,
Pete Yeatrakas

Rik Drummond wrote:
> 
> Thanks Marc...... I assume the reason for time-stamping is "non-repudiation of submission" and other
reasons. Correct?
> 
> Regards, Rik
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From:   Marc Blanchet [SMTP:Marc.Blanchet <at> viagenie.qc.ca]
> Sent:   Wednesday, January 21, 1998 5:21 PM
> To:     Rik Drummond; 'Werner, James K'; 'ietf-ediint <at> imc.org'
> Subject:        Timestamping
> 
> In the PKIX group, there is a draft on time stamping.
> (ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-pkix-ipki5tsp-00.txt)
> I was involved in the early work on it. This draft can give at least some

(Continue reading)

Group

gmane.ietf.ediint.

Search Archive

Page

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

Articles in period: 34

January 1998

Language

Change language

Options

Current view: Threads only / Showing only 20 lines / Not hiding cited text.
Change to All messages, whole messages, or hide cited text.

Post a message
NNTP Newsgroup
Classic Gmane web interface
XML

XML

RSS Feed
List Information

About Gmane

Recent entries

Information on Certificate Exchange Message (23 Jan 2011)
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-meadors-certificate-exchange-12.txt (15 Dec 2010)
update on draft-meadors-ediint-features-header and IANA review request (28 May 2010)
Is this mailing list still active? (18 Nov 2009)
I-D Action:draft-ietf-ediint-compression-11.txt (5 May 2008)
I-D Action:draft-ietf-ediint-compression-10.txt (25 Mar 2008)
I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ediint-compression-09.txt (23 Jul 2007)
I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ediint-compression-08.txt (11 Jun 2007)
I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ediint-compression-07.txt (1 Jun 2007)
RFC 4823 on FTP Transport for Secure Peer-to-Peer Business Data Interc (24 Apr 2007)
I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-ediint-compression-06.txt (17 Jan 2007)
Original EDI working group mailing list archive (15 Nov 2006)
Original EDI working group mailing list archive (14 Nov 2006)
Concerning http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-smime-cms-mu (21 Jul 2006)
EDI FTP transfer (13 May 2006)
WG Action: Conclusion of Electronic Data Interchange-Internet (14 Mar 2006)
CEM Draft update (7 Mar 2006)
AS2 Reliability and an issue for comment. (7 Mar 2006)
Document Action: 'FTP Transport for Secure Peer-to-Peer Business Data (6 Mar 2006)
update on EDIINT Features (22 Feb 2006)
making a decision on CEM (13 Feb 2006)

Archives

1	January 2011
1	December 2010
9	June 2010
1	May 2010
1	November 2009
1	May 2008
1	March 2008
1	July 2007
1	June 2007
1	May 2007
1	April 2007
1	January 2007
6	November 2006
1	July 2006
1	May 2006
7	March 2006
3	February 2006
4	January 2006
14	December 2005
5	November 2005
22	October 2005
4	August 2005
6	July 2005
6	June 2005
4	May 2005
13	April 2005
1	March 2005
5	February 2005
7	January 2005
3	December 2004
8	November 2004
7	October 2004
4	September 2004
5	August 2004
7	July 2004
2	June 2004
2	May 2004
8	April 2004
4	March 2004
2	February 2004
26	January 2004
1	December 2003
1	November 2003
2	September 2003
7	August 2003
2	July 2003
13	June 2003
3	March 2003
4	February 2003
36	January 2003
1	November 2002
22	October 2002
7	September 2002
3	August 2002
12	June 2002
12	May 2002
16	April 2002
25	March 2002
6	February 2002
4	January 2002
10	December 2001
23	November 2001
1	October 2001
8	September 2001
1	July 2001
2	June 2001
4	May 2001
14	April 2001
10	March 2001
4	February 2001
23	January 2001
6	December 2000
107	November 2000
14	October 2000
5	September 2000
5	August 2000
1	July 2000
4	June 2000
5	May 2000
17	April 2000
16	March 2000
6	February 2000
2	January 2000
4	December 1999
19	November 1999
16	October 1999
5	September 1999
11	August 1999
18	July 1999
21	June 1999
6	May 1999
61	April 1999
56	March 1999
53	February 1999
3	January 1999
22	December 1998
22	November 1998
43	October 1998
1	September 1998
23	August 1998
2	July 1998
8	June 1998
53	May 1998
31	April 1998
23	March 1998
30	February 1998
34	January 1998
48	December 1997
31	November 1997
14	October 1997
5	September 1997
29	August 1997
59	July 1997
101	June 1997
16	May 1997
37	April 1997
87	March 1997
49	February 1997
45	January 1997
44	December 1996
67	November 1996
83	October 1996
98	September 1996
26	August 1996
93	July 1996
73	June 1996
217	May 1996
58	April 1996
37	March 1996
79	February 1996
1	January 1995

Design

Zawodny | Right Menu | Left Menu

Your Own Design

Paste the URL of your CSS below. Download CSS template