[This message was posted by Scott Atwell of American Century Investments <[email protected]> to the "4.0 Session" discussion forum at http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/12. You can reply to it on-line at http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/read/ea4b290c - PLEASE DO NOT REPLY BY MAIL.]
No, option 2 is not valid. A message with PosDupFlag does not 'advance' the counterparty's next expected sequence number--that's what the Sequence Reset - Gap Fill does. > I have a scenario where broker/exchange asks for a resend. FIX42 > scenario > - Lets say broker is missing 4-10 messages and asks for resend. > - client goes through the list and finds that messages 4-7 need not be > send(whatever be the reason) instead send a gapfill message for them. > > Client has two options. > ---------------------- > option 1- it sends single gapfill message for 4-7 stating next > sequence is 8. then sends messages 8-10 with dup flag. option 2- It > sends messages 8-10 with dup flag. then sends a single gapfill > message with seq 10 and nextseq to 11. > > if option-2 is viable then I would like to implement option-2. Please > advise. ~Vimal [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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
