To keep on being the broken record stuck in a groove, the questions being posed by William below would be answered by a disciplined and rigorous top/down process analysis and requirements effort as described in the UN//CEFACT Unified Modeling Methodology. This approach results in the development of several artifacts (documents) that document not only the process, but the information exchanges between the various parties that interact within that process, the sequence (choreography) of the information exchange, the required business signals (acknowledgments), use case diagrams, scenarios, and requirements. All such artifacts are represented using a standard language and format (not unlike what we already do using X12 as our standard language for message design) that is clear and unambiguous.
By following the UMM approach, one chooses to use a more structured way of identifying what's truly needed to be specified in an EDI Addressing System specification, and documenting those requirements in a common language that can then be readily understood and used by various independent solution vendors to develop systems that interoperate to support the EDI Addressing requirements. Rachel Foerster Rachel Foerster & Associates, Ltd. Phone: 847-872-8070 -----Original Message----- From: William J. Kammerer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2002 4:54 PM To: WEDi/SNIP ID & Routing Subject: Re: Requirement for Domain Name Service I don't think there's a general consensus, yet, that the creation of a DNS "directory" is a requirement for the EDI Addressing Specification - but it definitely is an attractive candidate if we go the way of a distributed directory. Other alternatives for dispersal of EDI routing information might include peer messaging between VANs and Clearinghouses. I asked Kepa yesterday to set up a DNS domain for "discovering" me by my D-U-N-S (072930527) at Novannet. Less than 24 hours later, and a continent away, I was able to access the vaunted "MX" record Kepa's always talking about. Using the nslookup program that's available on every Windoze desktop, I queried on D-U-N-S 072930527: C:\>nslookup -type=all 072930527.duns.hipaa.net Server: resolver.qwest.net Address: 205.171.3.65 072930527.duns.hipaa.net nameserver = ns1.claredi.com 072930527.duns.hipaa.net internet address = 10.0.100.2 072930527.duns.hipaa.net MX preference = 40, mail exchanger = edi.novannet.com 072930527.duns.hipaa.net nameserver = ns1.claredi.com ns1.claredi.com internet address = 216.219.239.179 So given my D-U-N-S, the whole world can easily find my "host" name of edi.novannet.com. Obviously, if nslookup can do this magic query, then even I could write a program to do the same - code that might appear in hundreds of thousands of providers' practice management systems for locating trading partners! I would have preferred that I be pointed to by a URL, like http://novannet.com/MyEDIStuff.XML, where I could define my trading partner capabilities - but the MX record can only point to hosts. I'm hoping that we can find and use a DNS record type with more Kepa-bilities, such as pointers to URLs: we have to keep in mind that the people asked to define the "host" or sub-domain might be ignoramuses (like me) when it comes to the Internet technical stuff. Which is why I like the XML file idea (or 838 or CPP) pointed to by a URL (resolved through the DNS "directory") because that's more readily edited and understood. Questions to be resolved: (1) Who would actually maintain the DUNS (or NAIC, or HIN, or NPI) sub-domain? In this case, Kepa did on his own machine. I doubt very much we could talk Dun & Bradstreet into doing so. (2) What about security? Kepa just blindly trusted me when I told him what my D-U-N-S number was. How did he even know I was the one asking him by e-mail, aside from my inimitable writing style? William J. Kammerer Novannet, LLC. +1 (614) 487-0320 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rachel Foerster" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, 14 February, 2002 02:04 PM Subject: Requirement for Domain Name Service Is there general consensus among the participants on this list that the creation of a Domain Name Service is a requirement for the EDI Addressing Specification? If yes, would someone take a stab at stating the requirement concisely, clearly and succinctly. Such a clearly stated requirement is essential if the EDI Addressing Specification is to contain the necessary detailed specifications to satisfy such a requirement. Thanks, Rachel Foerster Rachel Foerster & Associates, Ltd. Phone: 847-872-8070
