[This message was posted by Kalpak Gadre of Omniscient Software Pvt. Ltd. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to the "General Q/A" discussion forum at http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/22. You can reply to it on-line at http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/read/9afd6cbe - PLEASE DO NOT REPLY BY MAIL.]
You could also detect this special case by writing some code and plugging it into QFJ and disconnect the session. But I agree, it rather makes sense to drop the connection instead of sending subsequent logons at the QFJ Engine level. Natraj, maybe you could log this as a bug on QFJ? > According to the 4.4 specification, "the connection should be shutdown > and manual intervention taken if this [sequence reset] process is > initiated but not followed properly". I haven't checked all the versions > of the specification but I assume this is the same or unspecified in > other FIX versions. To be 100% technically correct per the specification > this is the behavior that should be implemented by default in QFJ. Of > course, a configuration option also could be added to support the > assumption you described so that QFJ can compensate for nonstandard > counterparty FIX engines. [You can unsubscribe from this discussion group by sending a message to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Financial Information eXchange" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/FIX-Protocol?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
