[This message was posted by Hanno Klein of Deutsche Börse Systems 
<[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/12ce342f - PLEASE DO NOT REPLY BY MAIL.]

Correct, use Change and Delete to convey new information about existing orders 
in an order-depth scenario. Please also refer to 
http://www.fixprotocol.org/documents/4419/MDOWG_Book_Mgt_Final_draft.doc posted 
to the FPL Global Exchanges & Markets website.

> Thanks for the feedback Hanno.
> 
> I presume your suggestion that MDUpdateAction (279) should always be New
> (0) would only apply if the order book is disseminated by price depth
> (i.e. quantity at each price point is aggregated). The MDUpdateActions
> Change (1) and Delete (2) would probably be required for market orders
> if the order book is disseminated by order depth (i.e. the details of
> each order is disseminated).
> 
> 
> > I cannot answer your first question as valid values are being issued
> > by FPL in the order in which Extension Packs are being implemented.
> > The values you mention are likely but cannot be guaranteed.
> >
> > MDPriceLevel is an optional field and can thus be omitted when
> > sending market order information. They do not really belong to a
> > specific price,
> > e.g. level 1 but also level 0 might be confusing for users when
> >      implementing MDUpdateAction and shifting entries up or down. I
> >      suggest to keep the information separate. MDUpdateAction for
> >      market orders would then always be 0=NEW, i.e. you simply
> >      overwrite what you have.
> >
> > > We are currently working on an implementation at an exchange that,
> > > like the ISE, may require the dissemination of market orders in the
> > > order book in its market data feed. The support for this requirement
> > > proposed in the extension would be most helpful.
> > >
> > > I have two questions in this regard:
> > > 1. In terms of the proposed new values for MDEntryType (269), would
> > >    it be correct to assume that, if the proposal is approved, the
> > >    values that will be assigned for Market Bid and Market Offer will
> > >    be “b† and “c† respectively?
> > > 2. What is the recommendation for the MDPriceLevel (1023) of market
> > >    orders? Is there a need to include a MDPriceLevel (1023) for
> > >    market orders?


[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
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to