|
Transport Independence Framework
< Previous Next >
Re: Definition of Garbled message as per FIXT.1.1
Jim Northey / The LaSalle Technology Group <>
16 Jan 2010 3:22PM ET Mahesh, I don't believe that we reached this consensus on FIXT.1.1 in terms of extending the tag order to SenderCompID, TargetCompID and ApplVerID. There was considerable push back.
> In FIX_Transport_1.1.pdf page 38 of 66 (March 2008) defines a Garbled
> message as
>
> [start quote]
>
> BeginString (tag #8) is not the first tag in a message or is not of the
> format 8=FIXT.n.m.
>
> BodyLength (tag #9) is not the second tag in a message or does not
> contain the correct byte count.
>
> MsgType (tag #35) is not the third tag in a message.
>
> Checksum (tag #10) is not the last tag or contains an incorrect value.
>
> [End quote]
>
> The following additions should be made to the above list of definitions
> of a garbled message
>
> SenderCompID (tag #49) is not the fourth tag in a message.
>
> TargetCompID (tag #56) is not the fifth tag in a message.
>
> ApplVerID (tag #1128) if present in message is not the sixth tag in
> a message.
>
> Non numeric Tag is present in the message, for example ^X=123^
>
> (Request :- If this is not the correct forum for discussing
> FIX_Transport_1.1.pdf, please let me know the correct forum)
>
> Regards,
> K. Mahesh
Re: Definition of Garbled message as per FIXT.1.1
Jim Northey / The LaSalle Technology Group 16 Jan 2010 3:22PM ET
|
