William,

What you're describing is, as you know, how EDI works in the supply chain
today. The other challenge to think about, though, is when one uses the
public internet (privacy and encryption requirements aside). Then EDI
addressing is complicated by the fact that the X12 interchange must be put
into some "package." I've earlier argued that health care seriously examine
the ebXML Message Services specification, which I know you're very familiar
with.

So....do we have two separate but related EDI addressing issues?

1. EDI addressing in the ISA envelope
2. EDI addressing when the ISA envelope is the payload within another
message handling specification

Then we also need to keep in mind the coding systems already allowed as
valid for HIPAA:

01 Duns (Dun & Bradstreet)
14 Duns Plus Suffix
20 Health Industry Number (HIN)
27 Carrier Identification Number as assigned by Health Care Financing
Administration (HCFA)
28 Fiscal Intermediary Identification Number as assigned by Health Care
Financing Administration (HCFA)
29 Medicare Provider and Supplier Identification Number as assigned by
Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA)
30 U.S. Federal Tax Identification Number
33 National Association of Insurance Commissioners Company Code (NAIC)
ZZ Mutually Defined

Thus, the originator of an interchange can select its unique EDI address
from one of these systems and the receiver can select its own EDI address,
not necessarily from the same coding system. The challenge is how to know
when EDI address to use for the intended receiver.

Rachel Foerster

-----Original Message-----
From: William J. Kammerer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 9:56 PM
To: WEDi/SNIP ID & Routing
Subject: The "Domain Name Server" for Health Care


Ronald Bowron asked Chris Feahr "why is this any different than DNS over
TCP/IP?  The internet routes users to companies and WEB sites on a
regular basis.  Are the business requirements for managing this 'Trading
Partner Directory' any different?  Wouldn't that be a good model to
follow?"

The Domain Name Server (DNS) system is indeed a distributed database
that does seem to do a good job of keeping abreast of all high-level
domain names. It relies on each node's incentive to be accurately
recorded.  For example, I have every incentive to ensure the DNS system
knows which web server http://www.novannet.com/ is to resolve to, or
which e-mail server handles [EMAIL PROTECTED]  I do want to be
found.  I even pay money to a registrar to ensure everything is up to
date so you can find me!

I'll put aside the impertinent question of "how many payers want to be
found easily by providers?"  Seriously, DNS is a lot like the model I
thought VANs and Clearinghouses should employ:

   ...why couldn't the VAN or CH see that it doesn't recognize
   the NAIC code [in the ISA receiver field] as belonging to one
   of its customers, and automatically set up the interconnect?
   The VAN or CH could query every other intermediary it knows
   about to see if they own a direct connection.

There's no need for a centralized monolithic database.  Every
intermediary (VAN or CH) has incentives enough to know where their own
customers are.  Likewise, each of their paying customers - providers and
payers, alike - has an incentive to keep their own intermediary aware of
where they are on the information super-highway.

More problematical is whether an intermediary has any incentive to let
another (intermediary) know that a provider or payer is on its network.
Currently, it appears not to be the case because of the very weak
interconnection support provided by VANs and CHs.

William J. Kammerer
Novannet, LLC.



Reply via email to