MLLP2 instead of MLLP on encapsulation

[Lawrence Nelson]

Could someone please explain/educate me on encapsulation in regard to what the actual benefit of MLLP2 is over MLLP?

“The powers that be” heard something in a meeting with INFOR – stating it would reduce our ACK message counts and now we should  “do that”

– and I’m failing to see how that could be the case.

I have been pushing for Inter-Site routing and treating outbounds as inbounds to do that, but it’s a bigger sell to accomplish.

 

 

Lawrence Nelson
System Architect - MaineHealth IT

Topic

[Jim Kosloskey]

Lawrence,

As I understand it MLLP Version 2 does add the standard handling of the Commit Ack/Nak. In Cloverleaf, I am unsure what happens when a Commit Nak is received. I do not see anywhere to specify that handling and I am unsure what the standard says on that point. Perhaps the assumption is the engine does not need to know if a Commit Nak occurred. If that is the case, I disagree. I know a lot of shops set up to just unilaterally kill acknowledgments altogether, but I submit that is not good practice.

As for inter-site routing, be careful. There are limitations to how well that works – especially in high volume integrations. Under the covers, I understand it uses cross process handling which has limitations. I still recommend using TCP/IP ports on localhost to do inter site routing using length encoded TCP/IP and minimal ack (single hex code for pos/neg.  If you would like to discuss this off-line, email me.

I don’t understand your thinking regarding specifying clients as servers, specifically the advantages you anticipate.

email: jim.kosloskey@jim-kosloskey.com 30+ years Cloverleaf, 60 years IT – old fart.

[Lawrence Nelson]

Thank you Jim! I failed to check off notify by email for responses…

Lawrence Nelson
System Architect - MaineHealth IT

[Author]

Replies