|
5.0 Feedback
< Previous Next >
Re: ApplVerID vs CstmApplVerID
David Rosenborg / Pantor Engineering AB
21 Aug 2007 4:50PM ETOk, thanks for the pointer.
However, the document doesn't seem to clearly specify whether the CstmApplVerID is sufficient in it self to identify a particular version of a message or if the domain is local to the specified ApplVerID in which case you'd need booth. Nevertheless, I'm reading the document to mean that given a particular extension pack number, the underlying service pack follows implicitly.
This would mean that specifying the extension pack number alone is all you need. Which further means that the two versions could be combined into one identifier.
The combined identifier would still be an enumeration so size wouldn't be a problem. Since it is GTC that assignes both service and extension pack numbers, the sequence could be continuous. For example
7 = FIX 5.0
8 = FIX 5.0 EP 1
9 = FIX 5.0 EP 2
10 = FIX 5.0 SP 1 // Includes EP 1 & 2
...
And you could allow for custom extension identifiers in an upper range
4000 = FIX 5.0 EP 2 with some extra sugar on top
/David
> David -
>
> You can find some information on the usage of ApplVerID and
> CstmApplVerID in the document entitled Transport Independence, Service
> Packs and Application Versioning which is posted to the GTC page at the
> following link http://fixprotocol.org/documents/3206/FIX%20Protocol%20G-
> ap%20Analysis%20ServicePacks%20and%20Versioning_v091.doc
>
> The intention is that ApplVerID be used to state the base release of a
> given message. If necessary, CstmApplVerID would be used to specify a
> bilaterally agreed to custom extension of that base release. The
> document also makes allowance for the use of CstmApplVerID in conveying
> an approved extension pack where extension pack identifiers are assigned
> by the GTC and are sequential in nature, i.e. EP49, EP50, etc (where EP
> stands for extension pack). There is a need to address the use case
> where an EP + Custom extension is used.
>
> Bandwidth was deemed a consideration in using separate fields to
> identify application versions. ApplVerID can be concisely enumerated
> using, for example, a value of 7 which represents "FIX.5.0" or 8 for
> "FIX.5.0 SP1" as service packs are introduced.
>
Re: ApplVerID vs CstmApplVerID
David Rosenborg / Pantor Engineering AB 21 Aug 2007 4:50PM ET
|
