INTERNATIONAL  TELECOMMUNICATION  UNION	

CCITT	F.435
THE  INTERNATIONAL
TELEGRAPH  AND  TELEPHONE
CONSULTATIVE  COMMITTEE

MESSAGE  HANDLING  SERVICE

OPERATIONS  AND  DEFINITION  OF  SERVICE

MESSAGE  HANDLING:  ELECTRONIC  DATA
INTERCHANGE  MESSAGING  SERVICE

Recommendation  F.435

	Geneva, 1991	

Printed in Switzerland

FOREWORD
	The CCITT (the International Telegraph and Telephone Consultative Committee) is a permanent organ of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU). CCITT is responsible for studying technical, operating and tariff questions and issuing Recommendations on them with a view to standardizing telecommunications on a worldwide basis.
	The Plenary Assembly of CCITT which meets every four years, establishes the topics for study and approves Recommendations prepared by its Study Groups. The approval of Recommendations by the members of CCITT between Plenary Assemblies is covered by the procedure laid down in CCITT Resolution No. 2 (Melbourne, 1988).
	Recommendation F.435 was prepared by Study Group I and was approved under the Resolution No. 2 procedure on the 11 of March 1991.

___________________

CCITT  NOTE
	In this Recommendation, the expression “Administration” is used for conciseness to indicate both a telecommunication Administration and a recognized private operating agency.

ã  ITU  1991
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and microfilm, without permission in writing from the ITU.

PAGE BLANCHE

Recommendation F.435
Recommendation F.435
MESSAGE  HANDLING:  ELECTRONIC  DATA  INTERCHANGE  MESSAGING  SERVICE
	Introduction
	This Recommendation is one of a set of Recommendations for message handling. The entire set provides a comprehensive specification for message handling comprising any number of cooperating open-systems.
	Message handling systems and services enable users to exchange messages on a store-and-forward basis. A message submitted by one user, the originator, is conveyed by the message transfer system (MTS), the principal component of a larger message handling system (MHS), and is subsequently delivered to one or more additional users, the message's recipients.
	An MHS comprises a variety of interconnected functional entities. Message transfer agents (MTAs) cooperate to perform the store-and-forward message transfer function. Message stores (MSs) provide storage for messages and enable their submission, retrieval and management. User agents (UAs) help users access MHS. Access units (AUs) provide links to other communication systems and services of various kinds (e.g., other telematic services, postal services).
	This Recommendation defines the overall system and service description of the message handling application called EDI messaging.
1	Scope
	This Recommendation defines the overall system and service of EDI messaging.
	Other aspects of message handling systems and services are defined in other Recommendations. The layout of Recommendations defining the message handling system and services is shown in Table 1/F.400. The public services built on MHS, as well as access to and from the MHS for public services are defined in the F.400-Series of Recommendations.
	The technical aspects of MHS are defined in the X.400-Series of Recommendations. The overall system architecture of MHS is defined in Recommendation X.402. The technical aspects of EDI messaging are defined in Recommendation X.435.
2	References
	This Recommendation cites the documents listed below.
Rec. F.400		Message handling system and service overview, 1988.
ISO/IEC 10021-1	Information processing systems — Text communication — Message oriented text interchange systems (Message-oriented text interchange systems): System and service overview, 1988.
Rec. F.401		Message handling services: naming and addressing for public message handling services, 1988.
Rec. F.415		Message handling services: intercommunication with public physical delivery services, 1988.
Rec. X.402		Message handling systems: overall architecture, 1988.
ISO/IEC 10021-2	Message-oriented text interchange systems: overall architecture, 1988.
Rec. X.413		Message handling systems, message store: abstract service definition, 1988.

ISO/IEC 10021-5	Message-oriented text interchange systems: message store: abstract service definition, 1988.
Rec. X.435		Message handling systems, Electronic Data Interchange messaging system, 1991.
ISO/IEC 10021-n	Message-oriented text interchange systems
Rec. X.501		The Directory — Models, 1988.
ISO/IEC 9594-2	Information processing systems — Open systems interconnection — The Directory — Models, 1988.
Rec. X.509		The Directory — Authentication framework, 1988.
ISO/IEC 9594-8	Information processing systems — Open systems interconnection — The Directory — Authentication framework, 1988.
Rec. X.521		The directory — Selected object classes, 1988.
ISO/IEC 9594-7	Information processing systems — Open systems interconnection — The Directory — Selected object classes, 1988.
3	Definitions
	For the purpose of this Recommendation, the following definitions, and those defined in Annex A of this Recommendation, apply. 
	Definitions of the elements of service applicable to EDI messaging are contained in Annex B of this Recommendation. The elements of service applicable to the Message Transfer service, and used by EDI messaging, are called out in this Recommendation, however their definitions are contained in Recommendation F.400, Annex B.
3.1	EDI forwarding
	Onward transfer of a received EDIM to one or more recipients determined by the forwarding EDI user agent/message store.
	EDI forwarding takes place when an EDI message having been delivered to an EDI user agent or EDI message store is forwarded onward to another EDI user agent or EDI message store.
3.2	EDI message
	Information in electronic form that is transferred between EDI messaging users. An EDI message is a member of the primary class of information objects conveyed between EDI messaging users.
	See also Recommendation X.435 § 5.
3.3	EDI messaging user 
	User that engages in EDI messaging. An EDI messaging user originates, receives, or both originates and receives EDI messages. The EDI messaging environment contains any number of EDI messaging users. An EDI messaging user may be a person or a computer process. An EDI messaging user may access the EDI messaging system through an access unit.
3.4	EDI notification
	Member of the secondary class of information objects that indicates to the originator of an EDI message the disposition of EDIM responsibility for the EDI message.
3.5	EDI message responsibility
	EDI message responsibility indicates whether the subject EDI message has been made available to a specific user by its EDI user agent/message store. EDI message responsibility carries no legal significance within this Recommendation and Recommendation X.435.

4	Abbreviations
	ANSI		American National Standards Institute
	AU			Access unit
	DIT			Directory information tree
	DL			Distribution list
	DUA		Directory user agent
	EDI			Electronic data interchange
	EDIFACT	Electronic data interchange for Administration, commerce and transport
	EDIM		EDI message
	EDIME		EDI messaging environment
	EDIMG		EDI messaging
	EDIMS		EDI messaging system
	EDI-AU		EDI access unit
	EDI-MS		EDI message store
	EDI-UA		EDI user agent
	EDIN		EDI notification
	FN			Forwarded notification
	ID			Identifier
	MD			Management domain
	MH			Message handling
	MHS		Message handling system
	MS			Message store
	MT			Message transfer
	MTA		Message transfer agent
	MTS		Message transfer system
	NDN		Non-delivery notification
	NN			Negative notification
	O/R			Originator/Recipient
	PD			Physical delivery
	PDAU		Physical delivery access unit
	PDS			Physical delivery system
	PN			Positive notification
	PRMD		Private management domain
	TLMA		Telematic agent
	UA			User agent
	UNTDI		United Nations, trade data interchange
	UTC		Coordinated universal time
5	Conventions
	In the references section, ISO/IEC aligned standards are cited.
	Common language practices have been applied as far as possible in the use of capitalization of words.
6	EDI messaging service
6.1	Introduction
	The EDI messaging service provides an EDI messaging user with features to assist in communicating with other EDI messaging users. EDI messaging users are in many cases computer processes. The EDI messaging service uses the capabilities of the Message Transfer service (see also Recommendation F.410) for sending and receiving EDI messages. The elements of service describing the features of the EDI messaging service are defined in Annex B, and classified in § 14. 

	EDI, electronic data interchange, can be described as computer to computer exchange of structured business data, such as invoices and purchase orders. In some cases the EDI messaging service can be used to transmit an EDI interchange to a physical rendition system, such as a physical delivery system, or facsimile.
	The EDI messaging service is provided by EDI messaging.
6.2	EDI messaging
	EDI messaging (EDIMG) consists of the exchange of EDI messages (EDIMs), and EDI notifications (EDINs), which are information objects specified in Recommendation X.435.
6.3	EDI messaging environment
	The environment in which EDI messaging takes place can be modelled as a functional object which is hereafter referred to as the EDI messaging environment (EDIME). When refined (i.e., functionally decomposed), the EDIME can be seen to comprise lesser objects referred to as the primary objects of EDI messaging. They include a single central object, the EDI messaging system (EDIMS), and numerous peripheral objects called EDI messaging users (EDIMG users).
	The structure of the EDIME is depicted in Figure 1/F.435.
Fig. 1/F.435 = 6 cm

6.4	EDI messaging user
	An EDI messaging user (EDIMG user) is a user that engages in EDI messaging. An EDIMG user originates, receives, or both originates and receives EDIMs. The EDIME contains any number of EDIMG users.
	An EDIMG user may be a person or a computer process. An EDIMG user may access the EDIMS through an access unit.
7	EDI messaging system
7.1	Introduction
	The EDI messaging system (EDIMS) is the functional object by means of which all EDIMG users communicate with one another in EDI messaging.

	The EDIMS can be modelled as comprising lesser functional objects which interact with one another. These lesser objects are referred to as the secondary objects of EDI messaging. They include a single, central object, the message transfer system (MTS), and numerous peripheral objects of three kinds: EDI user agents (EDI-UAs), EDI message stores (EDI-MSs), and EDI access units (EDI-AUs).
	The structure of the EDIMS is depicted in Figure 2/F.435. As shown in Figure 2, EDI-UAs, EDI-MSs, and EDI-AUs are the objects by which the EDIMS provides service to EDIMG users.
Fig. 2/F.435 = 8 cm

7.1.1	EDI user agents
	An EDI user agent (EDI-UA) is a user agent tailored so as to better assist a single EDIMG user to engage in EDI messaging. It helps that EDIMG user originate and receive messages containing EDIMs. The EDIMS contains any number of EDI-UAs.
	Note — An exact definition of the boundary between the EDI-UA and the EDIMG user is beyond the scope of this Recommendation.
7.1.2	EDI message store
	An EDI message store (EDI-MS) is a message store tailored so as to better assist a single EDI-UA engage in EDI messaging. It helps that EDI-UA submit, take delivery of, store, and retrieve messages containing EDIMs.
7.1.3	Message transfer system
	In the present context the message transfer system (MTS) conveys EDIMs or EDI notifications (EDINs) between EDI-UAs, or between an EDI-UA and an access unit. The EDIMS contains a single MTS.
7.1.4	EDI access units
	An EDIMG user may have access to/from the EDIMS through an access unit (AU). One type of access unit is the physical delivery access unit (PDAU). In EDIMG, the physical delivery access unit provides the ability to send messages to EDIMG recipients through a physical delivery system (PDS). Other types of EDI-AUs (e.g., facsimile access units) may be the subject of future standardization.

7.2	Information flow in the EDIMS
	Figure 3/F.435 expands on Figure 2/F.435 and shows the principal information flows in EDI messaging.
Fig. 3/F.435 = 18 cm

7.3	EDI messaging service functional model
	Figure 4/F.435 shows the functional model of the EDI messaging service. The UAs used in the EDI messaging service comprise a specific class of cooperating UAs. The optional PDAU allows EDIMG users to send messages to indirect users outside of the EDI messaging environment. The message stores used in the EDI messaging 
service have specific EDI related functions and can optionally be used by EDIMG users to take delivery of messages on their behalf. The telematic agent (TLMA) shown in Figure 4/F.435 will allow access to telematic services and may be the subject of future standardization.
Fig. 4/F.435 = 12 cm

7.4	Structure of EDI messages
	The EDI class of UAs create messages containing a content specific to the EDI messaging service. The specific content that is sent from one EDI-UA to another is a result of an originator, which is generally an application process, composing and sending a message, called an EDI message (EDIM). The EDIM carries the EDI interchange and optionally other information associated with the EDI interchange. Only one EDI interchange shall be present in an EDIM. Every EDIM shall contain an EDI interchange body part on origination of the EDIM. Any of the body parts can subsequently be removed (wholly, not partially) when forwarding an EDIM, except a forwarded body part, which cannot be removed. Body parts that are removed when forwarding are replaced with place holders to indicate what type of body part was removed. The heading of an EDIM shall not be removed when forwarding an EDIM. The structure of an EDIM as it relates to the basic message structure of MHS is shown in Figure 5/F.435. The EDIM is conveyed with an envelope when being transferred through the MTS.
Fig. 5/F.435 = 10,5 cm

Fig. 6/F.435 = 11 cm

	Figure 6/F.435 shows a mapping between a typical EDI interchange, and the corresponding EDI message structure. The EDI interchange is mapped entirely within one body part, called the primary body part, and may be an EDIFACT, ANSI X12, UNTDI or privately defined EDI interchange. Other body parts are available to convey information associated with the EDI interchange such as drawings, explanatory text, etc. The heading of the EDIM contains various fields of information, some of which are present in the EDIFACT interchange header segments (or corresponding ISA or STX segments for ANSI X12 and UNTDI), and others containing service requests from the originator. The heading and body part(s) form the EDIM.
7.5	EDI notification
	An EDIMG user can request that a recipient return an EDI notification (EDIN) indicating the disposition of the EDI message received. This notification is requested by an originating EDI-UA, and is generated by a recipient EDI-UA, EDI-MS, or AU. There are 3 possible conditions that can be requested and reported on, resulting in either the generation of a positive notification (PN), a negative notification (NN), or a forwarded notification (FN). The implied meanings of the responses PN, NN, and FN are described in § 8.1. It is possible to forward a received EDI message unchanged and forward the obligation to respond to the notification request to the recipient to whom the EDI message is forwarded, or intermediate recipients, who then shall respond to the original originator of the message. An originating EDI-UA may request to be notified if the obligation to respond to the notification request has been forwarded. In this case, the EDI-UA or EDI-MS that forwards the EDIM shall send to the originating EDI-UA an EDI forwarded notification (FN).
	In all cases, including notifications sent by EDI-UAs to whom the EDIM has been forwarded, the notifications shall contain the O/R name of the recipient that was specified by the original originator.
	The originating EDI-UA may request any combination of the several EDINs from any combination of the recipients to whom the EDIM is sent. If no notifications are requested by an originator, none shall be sent by the recipient(s).
	EDI notifications cannot be forwarded, and EDI notifications cannot be requested for EDINs.
8	EDIM responsibility and forwarding
8.1	Introduction
	The EDIMS includes a concept called EDIM responsibility. This concept is key to the description below of EDINs and forwarding. In order to simplify the descriptions in the text below, all forwarding is shown as performed by the EDI-UA. It should be noted that the descriptions apply equally to forwarding performed by the EDI-MS.
	The purpose for introducing the concept of EDIM responsibility is primarily to provide a method for confirming the passing of messages amongst EDI-UAs. EDIM responsibility may apply to access units in certain cases. The concept of EDIM responsibility is described as follows.
	EDIM responsibility indicates that the EDIM is made available to the EDIMG user by the receiving EDI-UA. EDIM responsibility shall always be accepted when the EDI-UA adds or removes body parts when forwarding. An EDIM cannot leave the EDIMS unless EDIM responsibility has been accepted (delivery to a PDAU is a special case as described in § 11.3). If requested to do so by the originating EDI-UA, the recipient EDI-UA, and possibly intermediate EDI-UAs (if requested), shall send EDINs to the originating EDI-UA.
	When an EDI-UA receives an EDIM it shall, if requested to do so, inform the originating EDI-UA that the recipient EDI-UA has accepted or refused EDIM responsibility by sending an appropriate EDIN. Paragraph 8.2 below contains a detailed description of the EDINs that are sent in various scenarios.

	If notifications are requested, then when an EDI-UA accepts, refuses, or forwards EDIM responsibility, it shall send an appropriate EDIN to the originator, and if forwarding, it shall create the appropriate heading fields in the forwarded EDIM. The details of these operations are described in Recommendation X.435.
	Body parts that are forwarded cannot be changed in any way. If EDIM responsibility is forwarded, the forwarded EDIM cannot be changed in any way. If EDIM responsibility is accepted, body parts may be removed from, or added to the original EDIM when creating the forwarded EDIM. Body parts that are removed when forwarding are replaced with place holders to indicate what type of body part was removed. EDIM responsibility forwarding is limited to only one recipient.
	EDIMG includes mechanisms to prevent looping when forwarding.
8.2	Forwarding and secondary distribution
	In EDIMG it may be desirable to receive EDI messages at a central EDI user agent, with subsequent forwarding to the final EDI user agents. Such a practice would, for example, enable a large organization to perform centralized functions such as logging, auditing, etc., on all EDI message traffic entering that organization. After performance of these functions the traffic would be distributed to the EDI user agents serving the recipient EDI applications. Similarly, a value added network service provider might operate a similar intermediary stage on behalf of its customers. The following text describes the use of an EDI-UA as such an intermediary stage.
	Since an intermediate EDI-UA will generally not be the final EDI-UA, there is a need to provide end-to-end confirmation of EDIM responsibility acceptance for an EDIM within EDIMG. The element of service “EDI notification Request” allows an originator to request from each recipient, positive, negative and forwarded notifications. Together with protocol elements defined in Recommendation X.435, the “EDI notification request” allows intermediate EDI-UAs to indicate, in a forwarded message, whether or not EDIM responsibility has been accepted. These tools allow EDIM responsibility acceptance to be deferred until an EDIM reaches the final EDI-UA, and provide an indication to that EDI-UA that a notification is to be returned to the original originator. 
	In order to illustrate the use of an EDI-UA as an intermediate stage, three cases are described below. In all cases, an EDIM originates in EDI-UA1 and terminates in EDI-UA3. EDI-UA2 is the intermediate EDI-UA. In cases 1 and 2 it is assumed that the EDIM is forwarded with content unchanged. In all three cases it is assumed that EDI-UA1 has requested notifications.
	Note — Events described in the following tables are not necessarily performed in the exact sequential order shown in the table 1/F.435.
8.3	Case 1: No forwarding
	The EDIM prepared by EDI-UA1 is addressed to EDI-UA3. The EDIM is submitted to MTA1, transferred to MTA3, delivered to EDI-UA3 and retrieved by EDIMG user 3. EDI-UA3 will respond with an appropriate EDIN, accepting EDIM responsibility (i.e., PN). (If EDI-UA3 had determined that EDIMG user 3 could not retrieve the message, EDI-UA3 would have responded with an EDIN refusing EDIM responsibility (i.e., NN)). Figure 7/F.435 illustrates the flow of information. The sequence of EDIMs and EDINs is depicted in Table 1/F.435
Fig. 7/F.435 = 12.5 cm

TABLE 1/F.435
Case 1: No forwarding
Events	EDIM	EDIN	
1	EDI-UA1 submits EDIM to MTA1		
2	MTA1 transfers EDIM to MTA3		
3	MTA3 delivers EDIM to EDI-UA3		
4		EDI-UA3 submits PN/NN to MTA3	
5		MTA3 transfers PN/NN to MTA1	
6		MTA1 delivers PN/NN to EDI-UA1	

8.4	Case 2: Content not changed and EDIM responsibility forwarded
	In this case an intermediary EDI-UA forwards a message from EDI-UA1 to EDI-UA3. The final recipient is EDI-UA3, and EDI-UA2 performs a forward operation, forwarding EDIM responsibility to EDI-UA3. The EDIM prepared by EDI-UA1 is addressed to EDI-UA2. The EDIM is delivered to EDI-UA2, which forwards it unchanged to EDI-UA3, based on selection criteria known to EDI-UA2.
	EDIM responsibility is handled as follows:
1)	When EDI-UA2 forwards EDIM responsibility, it shall create the forwarded EDIM so that requested EDINs are received by EDI-UA1, (see Recommendation X.435 for details). The following EDINs may be sent.
1a)	If EDI-UA1 requested notification of forwarding of EDIM responsibility, EDI-UA2 shall send forwarded notification - FN to EDI-UA1. This EDIN is sent when EDI-UA2 successfully submits the EDIM to MTA2.
1b)	If EDI-UA2 receives a non-delivery notification from MTA3 (via MTA2) it may send negative notification — NN to EDI-UA1. Note that EDI-UA2 has the choice to send or not to send the EDIN in this case.
	No other EDINs may be requested or sent. For example, EDI-UA2 cannot request notifications from EDI-UA3, and EDI-UA3 cannot send EDINs to EDI-UA2.
	In the case of non-delivery, EDI-UA2 may attempt to resubmit the EDIM to the intended recipient. In this case, the NN to EDI-UA1 is sent only when EDI-UA2 determines that it shall no longer attempt to resubmit the EDIM to EDI-UA3.
1c)	If forwarding succeeds, EDI-UA3 shall send an appropriate EDIN to EDI-UA1, accepting or refusing EDIM responsibility.
	Figure 8/F.435 illustrates the information flow described above for case 2. The sequence of possible EDIMs and EDINs is explained in Table 2/F.435. Events (8,11,13,15 ) and (10,12,14,16 ) are mutually exclusive.
Fig. 8/F.435 = 12.5 cm

TABLE 2/F.435
Case 2: EDIM responsibility forwarded
Events	EDIM	EDIN	NDN	
1	EDI-UA1 submits EDIM to MTA1			
2	MTA1 transfers EDIM to MTA2			
3	MTA2 delivers EDIM to EDI‑UA2			
4		If requested, EDI‑UA2 submits FN to MTA2		
5	EDI-UA2 submits forwarded EDIM to MTA2			
6		MTA2 transfers FN to MTA1		
7	MTA2 transfers EDIM to MTA3			
8			MTA2 sends NDN to EDI‑UA2	
9		MTA1 delivers FN to EDI‑UA1		
10	MTA3 delivers EDIM to EDI‑UA3			
11			EDI-UA2 submits NN to MTA2	
12		EDI-UA3 submits PN/NN to MTA3		
13			MTA2 transfers NN to MTA1	
14		MTA3 transfers PN/NN to MTA1		
15			MTA1 delivers NN to EDI‑UA1	
16		MTA1 delivers PN/NN to EDI‑UA1		

	The following should be noted:
1)	EDI-UA1 will usually receive several EDINs if it requests FN ( forwarded notification).
2)	EDI-UA1 may receive EDINs in a sequence other than that in which they were created.
3)	EDI-UA1 may receive no EDIN whatsoever even if it requested FN (for example, in the case of catastrophic failure of EDI-UA2 after MTA2 has delivered the EDIM to EDI-UA2).
	It is up to EDI-UA1 to correctly handle 1 through 3 above. Item 1 can be handled for example, by keeping track of:
a)	the EDIM ID,
b)	the original recipient,
c)	the submission time, and
d)	the EDI notifications expected.

	Item 2 can be handled by using the UTC time included in the EDIN (EDIN creation time). Item 3 can be handled with a time-out mechanism in EDI-UA1. Mechanisms to handle 1 to 3 are local implementation issues, thus beyond the scope of this Recommendation.
8.5	Case 3: EDIM responsibility not forwarded
	This scenario provides for the case where the EDIM prepared by EDI-UA1 is addressed to EDI-UA2, and EDI-UA2 accepts EDIM responsibility for the message prior to forwarding to EDI-UA3. This would occur, for example, if EDI-UA2 were to add or remove body parts when forwarding (changes of the content). When EDIM responsibility is accepted, EDI-UA2 sends an EDIN to the originator (i.e., PN), and creates the forwarded EDIM so that no further EDINs are received by EDI-UA1 (the originator) (see Recommendation X.435 for details). As in case 2, EDI-UA1 addresses the EDIM to EDI-UA2. As in both previous cases EDI-UA3 represents the final destination.
	Upon retrieval of the EDIM, EDI-UA2 returns an appropriate notification to EDI-UA1. The message is then forwarded to EDI-UA3. Since initial EDIM responsibility has now been accepted, EDI-UA2 is at liberty to request EDIM responsibility or not, as desired. If requested, the resulting EDIM responsibility relationship shall apply between EDI-UA3 and EDI-UA2, i.e. not end to end as in the previous cases. In the scenario described here EDIM responsibility is assumed to have been requested, with the result that EDI-UA3 responds to EDI-UA2 with an appropriate notification.
	Figures 9/F.435 and 10/F.435 illustrate the flow of information for case 3. The sequence of EDIMs and EDINs for case 3 are explained in Table 3/F.435.
Fig. 9/F.435 = 12.5 cm

Fig. 10/F.435 = 12,5 cm

TABLE 3/F.435
Case 3: responsibility not forwarded
Events	Figure 9/F.435	Figure 10/F.435	
1	EDI-UA1 submits EDIM to MTA1		
2	MTA1 transfers EDIM to MTA2		
3	MTA2 delivers EDIM to EDI-UA2		
4	EDI-UA2 submits PN to MTA2		
5		EDI-UA2 submits forwarded EDIM to MTA2	
6	MTA2 transfers PN au MTA1		
7		MTA2 transfers EDIM to MTA3	
8	MTA1 delivers  PN to EDI-UA1		
9		MTA3 delivers EDIM to EDI-UA3	
10		EDI-UA3 submits PN/NN to MTA3	
11		MTA3 transfers PN/NN to MTA2	
12		MTA2 delivers PN/NN to EDI-UA2	

9	EDI naming, addressing and use of directory
	The MHS use of Directory as defined in Recommendation F.400, § 13 is used to provide the Directory services required for EDI messaging.
	Each management domain should provide directory services for its EDIMG users. 
	EDI messaging, naming and addressing and the subsequent directory service requirements are outlined in Annex D of this Recommendation.
10	EDI security
	The MHS security capabilities are defined in Recommendation F.400 in § 15, and are also applicable for EDI messaging. In addition, the following extensions are provided to § 15.4 of the above referenced document.
	An overview of the extended security capabilities in EDIMG is as follows:
	Proof of EDI notification: Enables the recipient of an EDIM to create an EDIN which may be used by the recipient of the EDIN to authenticate the originator of the EDIN.
	Non-repudiation of the EDI notification: Provides the recipient of an EDIN with proof of the origin of the EDIN which will protect against any attempt by the originator of the EDIN from falsely denying sending the EDIN.
	Proof of content received: Enables the originator of an EDIM to verify that the message content received by the recipient was the same as the message content originated by the originator.
	Non-repudiation of content originated: Provides the recipient of the EDIM with proof that the message content received was the same as the message content originated. This protects against any attempt by the originator to falsely deny originating the message content.
	Non-repudiation of content received: Provides the originator of the EDIM with proof that the message content received was the same as the message content originated. This proof will protect against any attempt by the recipient to falsely deny the content of the EDIM received.
TABLE 4/F.435
Provision and use of secure messaging elements of service by MHS components
Elements of service	EDIM originator	MTS	EDIM recipient	
Proof of EDI notification	U	-	P	
Non-repudiation of EDI notification	U	-	P	
Proof of content received	U	-	P	
Non-repudiation of content originated	P	-	U	
Non-repudiation of content received	U	-	P	
P	A provider of the service
U	A user of the service				

	Annex C describes the EDIMS vulnerabilities and details how they are countered. Annex A of Recommendation X.435 describes the enhancements required to the Recommendation X.402 security model for EDIMS (the enhanced security services). Recommendation X.435 describes operations and procedures for security services.
11	Intercommunication with physical delivery services
11.1	Introduction
	As defined in Recommendation F.415, MH/PD intercommunication is a generic capability of the Message Transfer service. To make use of this capability, the originator may use a postal O/R address on submission, or, if using a directory name on submission, select physical delivery as the “Requested delivery method” and choose any desired options from the MH/PD elements of service (Table 1/F.415).
	The originator provides the address of the recipient as defined in Recommendation F.401, postal O/R address. This may be done through the Directory.
11.2	Delivery and notifications
	Delivery to the access unit occurs when the EDIM is passed from the final MTA to the PDAU (MTS to EDI‑AU).
	Delivery notifications and EDI notifications relevant to physical delivery apply as defined in Recommendation F.415 with the addition of an EDIN, as depicted below in Figure 11/F.435.
	These notifications are generated by the MTA/PDAU system components, which are considered to be
co-located.
	Definitions of “T” times are provided in Recommendation F.415; “Tedi” can be defined as:
	Tedi =	Generation and delivery of the EDIN.
	Note 1 — Start time corresponds to the time at which the EDIN is generated.
	Note 2 — End time corresponds to the time that the EDIN is made available to the EDIMG user.
11.3	Transfer of EDIM responsibility
	While it is up to the PDAU to physically render and subsequently deliver an EDIM sent to it, a PDAU can never accept EDIM responsibility for an EDIM. If an “EDI notification request” is asked for, two possibilities exist for the PDAU. If it determines that it can render the EDIM for physical delivery, it shall return an FN to the originator of the EDIM. However, if it determines that it cannot render or deliver the EDIM, it shall return an NN to the originator of the EDIM.
11.4	Physical rendition
	The basic physical rendition details defined in Recommendation F.415, Annex B, should be used as a base, primarily for the rendition of routing and delivery information such as the address blocks, position on the page relative to the window, etc.
	For hard copy physical rendition specific to EDI, three approaches are identified;
1)	Standardized rendition
2)	Privately defined rendition
3)	Accompanying information for rendition (may be the subject of future standardization).
	Alternatively, if rendition rules are not available, the EDIM could simply be printed “as is”, if possible, assuming that the recipient is able to work with the information, possibly with guidelines provided through some other means or message. (Additional guidelines and rules for the physical rendition of EDIMs may be the subject of future standardization.)
Fig. 11/F.435 = 23 cm

12	Use of message store for EDI
	Message store features may be used for EDI messaging. The general MS elements of service, “stored message fetching”, “stored message listing”, “stored message summary”, “stored message deletion”, and “stored message alert” are applicable for EDI messaging.
	General MS attributes and auto-actions are described in Recommendation X.413. EDI specific MS attributes and auto actions are described in Recommendation X.435.
	An EDI specific MS element of service, “Stored EDI message auto-forward”, provides suitable MS auto-forwarding capabilities for EDI messaging.
	Security policies may restrict the use of message store elements of service.
13	Elements of service
	Elements of service are particular features, functions, or capabilities of MHS. The elements of service applicable for EDI messaging are made up of MT elements of service and EDI messaging elements of service. The MT elements of service used in EDI messaging are called out in this Recommendation in Tables 5/F.435 to 7/F.435, however they are defined in Recommendation F.400, Annex B. The definitions of elements of service specific to EDI messaging are also listed in Tables 5/F.435 to 7/F.435, and are defined in Annex B. The realization of all the elements of service applicable to EDI messaging is described in other Recommendations in the X.400-Series.
14	Classification of elements of service
14.1	Basic EDI messaging service
	The basic EDI messaging service, which makes use of the MT service, enables an EDIMG user to send and receive EDI messages. An EDIMG user prepares EDI messages with the assistance of an EDI user agent (EDI-UA). EDI-UAs cooperate with each other to facilitate communication between their respective EDIMG users. To send an EDI message, the originating EDIMG user submits the message to his EDI-UA specifying the O/R name of the recipient who is to receive the EDI message. The EDI message, which has an identifier conveyed with it, is then sent by the originator's EDI-UA to the recipient's EDI-UA/MS via the Message Transfer service.
	Following a successful delivery to the recipient's EDI-UA/MS, the EDI message is available for the recipient. To facilitate meaningful communication, a recipient can specify the encoded information type(s) contained in EDI messages that he will allow to be delivered to his EDI-UA, as well as the maximum length of an EDI message that he is willing to accept. The original encoded information type(s) and an indication if any conversions that have been performed and the resulting encoded information type(s) are supplied with each delivered EDI message. In addition, the submission time and delivery time are supplied with each EDI message. Non-delivery notification is provided with the basic MT service. The elements of service belonging to the basic EDI messaging service are listed in Table 5/F.435.
TABLE 5/F.435
Elements of service belonging to the basic EDI messaging service
Elements of service	References	
Access management		B.1	
Content type indication		B.12	
Converted indication		B.15	
Delivery time stamp indication		B.22	
EDI message identification		EDI.8	
Message identification		B.41	
Non-delivery notification		B.47	
Orginal encoded information types indication		B.54	
Submission time stamp indication		B.89	
Type body		EDI.30	
User/UA capabilities registration		B.93	
Note — B references are to Annex B Recommendation F.400, and EDI references are to Annex B in this Recommendation.		

14.2	EDI messaging service optional user facilities
	A set of the elements of service of the EDI messaging service are optional user facilities. The optional user facilities of the EDI messaging service, which may be selected on a per-message basis or for an agreed contractual period of time, are listed in Table 6/F.435 and Table 7/F.435, respectively. 
	The optional user facilities of the EDI messaging service that are selected on a per-message basis are classified for both origination and reception by EDI-UAs. If a management domain offers these optional user facilities for origination by EDI-UAs, then an EDIMG user is able to create and send EDI messages according to the procedures defined for the associated element of service. If a management domain offers these optional user facilities for reception by EDI-UAs/MSs/AUs, then the receiving EDI-UA/MS/AU shall be able to receive and recognize the indication associated with the corresponding element of service and to inform the EDIMG user of the requested optional user facility. Each optional user facility is classified as additional (A) or essential (E) for EDI-UAs/MSs/AUs from these two perspectives.

TABLE 6/F.435
EDI messaging optional user facilities selectable on a per-message basis
Elements of service	Origination	Reception	References	
Additional physical rendition	A	A		B.2	
Alternate recipient allowed	E	E		B.3	
Application security element	A	A		EDI.1	
Basic physical rendition	A	E*		B.7	
Character set	E	E		EDI.2	
Content confidentiality	A	A		B.10	
Content integrity	A	A		B.11	
Conversion prohibition	E	E		B.13	
Conversion prohibition in case of loss of information	A	A		B.14	
Counter collection	A	E*		B.16	
Counter collection with advice	A	A		B.17	
Cross reference information	A	E		EDI.3	
Deferred delivery	E	N/A		B.19	
Deferred delivery cancellation	E	N/A		B.20	
Delivery notification	E	N/A		B.21	
Delivery via bureaufax service	A	A		B.23	
Designation of recipient by directory name	A	N/A		B.24	
Disclosure of other recipients	E	E		B.25	
DL expansion history indication	N/A	E		B.26	
DL expansion prohibited	A	N/A		B.27	
EDI forwarding	A	N/A		EDI.4	
EDI message type(s)	E	E		EDI.5	
EDI notification request	E	E		EDI.6	
EDI standard indication	E	E		EDI.7	
EDIM responsibility forwarding allowed indication	E	E		EDI.9	
EDIN receiver	A	E		EDI.10	
EMS (Express Mail Service)a)	A	E*		B.28	
Expiry date time indication	A	E		EDI.11	
Explicit conversion	A	N/A		B.30	
Grade of delivery selection	E	E		B.32	
Incomplete copy indication	A	E		EDI.12	
Interchange header	E	E		EDI.13	
Latest delivery designation	A	N/A		B.39	
Message flow confidentiality	A	N/A		B.40	
Message origin authentication	A	A		B.42	
Message security labelling	A	A		B.43	
Message sequence integrity	A	A		B.44	
Multi-destination delivery	E	N/A		B.45	
Multi-part body	A	E		EDI.14	
Non-repudiation of content originated	A	A		EDI.15	
Non-repudiation of content received	A	A		EDI.16	
Non-repudiation of content received request	A	A		EDI.17	
Non-repudiation of delivery	A	A		B.49	
Non-repudiation of EDI notification	A	A		EDI.18	

TABLE 6/F.435 (cont.)
Elements of service	Origination	Reception	References	
Non-repudiation of EDI notification request	A	A		EDI.19	
Non-repudiation of origin	A	A		B.50	
Non-repudiation of submission	A	A		B.51	
Obsoleting indication	A	E		EDI.20	
Ordinary mail	A	E*		B.53	
Originator indication	E	E		EDI.21	
Originator requested alternate recipient	A	N/A		B.56	
Physical delivery notification by MHS	A	A		B.57	
Physical delivery notification by PDS	A	E*		B.58	
Physical forwarding allowed	A	E*		B.59	
Physical forwarding prohibited	A	E*		B.60	
Prevention of non-delivery notification	A	N/A		B.61	
Probe	A	N/A		B.63	
Probe origin authentication	A	N/A		B.64	
Proof of content received	A	A		EDI.22	
Proof of content received request	A	A		EDI.23	
Proof of delivery	A	A		B.65	
Proof of EDI notification	A	A		EDI.24	
Proof of EDI notification request	A	A		EDI.25	
Proof of submission	A	N/A		B.66	
Recipient indication	E	E		EDI.26	
Redirection disallowed by originator	A	N/A		B.68	
Registered mail	A	A		B.70	
Registered mail to addressee in person	A	A		B.71	
Related message(s)	A	E		EDI.27	
Report origin authentication	A	A		B.74	
Request for forwarding address	A	A		B.75	
Requested delivery method	E	N/A		B.76	
Services indication	A	A		EDI.28	
Special deliverya)	A	E*		B.81	
Stored message deletion	N/A	E**		B.84	
Stored message fetching	N/A	E**		B.85	
Stored message listing	N/A	E**		B.86	
Stored message summary	N/A	E**		B.87	
Undeliverable mail with return of physical message	A	E*		B.91	
Use of distribution list	A	N/A		B.92	
E	Essential optional user facility shall be provided
E*	Essential optional user facility only applying to PDAUs
E**Essential optional user facility only applying to MSs
A	Additional optional user facility may be provided
N/A	Not applicable
a)	At least EMS or “Special delivery” shall be supported by the PDAU and associated PDS.
Note 1 — Bilateral agreement may be necessary in cases of reception by EDI-UA of elements of service classified as “A”.
Note 2 — B references are to Annex B to Recommendation F.400, and EDI references are to Annex B to this Recommendation
TABLE 7/F.435
EDI messaging service optional user facilities agreed for a contractual period of time
Elements of service	Classification	References	
Alternate recipient assignment	A		B.4	
Hold for delivery	A		B.33	
Implicit conversion	A		B.34	
MS register	A		B.nna)	
Redirection of incoming messages	A		B.69	
Restricted delivery	A		B.77	
Secure access management	A		B.79	
Stored EDI message auto-forward	A		EDI.29	
Stored message alert	A		B.82	
Stored message auto-forward	A		B.83b)	
a)	This element of service shall be defined and assigned a “B” number in the next publication of Recommendation F.400. It describes a capability that is supported in Recom-
mendation X.413, but not described in Recommendation F.400.
b)	The use of this element of service, which is a general MS capability, is discouraged for EDI messaging. “Stored EDI message auto-forward”, which is an EDI specific MS capability, provides a suitable alternative.
Note — B references are to Annex B to Recommendation F.400, and EDI references are to Annex B to this Recommendation.			

15	Quality of service
15.1	EDI message status
	The unique identification of each EDI message enables the system to provide information about e.g., the status of an EDI message.
	In the event of system failure all accepted and non-delivered EDI messages should be traceable. If EDI messages cannot be delivered, the originator shall be informed by a “Non-delivery notification” unless the originator invoked “Prevention of non-delivery notification”.
15.2	Support by providers of EDI service
	Service providers should provide assistance to their subscribers, with regard to non-delivery notifications not being received in due time, as far as system components are concerned. Additional provision of support for status and tracing of messages may be provided under national responsibility.

15.3	Model of delivery and notification times
	See Figure 12/F.435.
Fig. 12/F.435 = 21,5 cm

15.4	EDI message delivery time targets
	The delivery time targets (including transfer times) are dependent on the message transfer system, on the number of transiting domains, and on message sizes. Values significantly less than those currently specified for the IPM service are aimed at.
	The management domain of the recipient EDI-UA should force non-delivery notification if the EDI message has not been delivered within x hours after submission (or after date and time indicated for deferred delivery), the value of x being dependent on the grade of delivery requested by the originator.
	The specification of these values for the EDI service may be the subject of future standardization.
15.5	EDI notification time targets
	Delivery time targets for EDI notifications depend on local arrangements. When EDINs are initiated by the receiving EDI-UA they have the same time targets as the EDI messages that caused them to occur (see Table 8/F.435).
TABLE 8/F.435
EDIN time targets
Grade of delivery	95% delivered before	
Urgent	15 minutes	
Normal	60 minutes	
Non-urgent	4 hours	
Note 1 — Intercommunication with PRMDs is not included in the calculation of the time targets.
Note 2 — The values are provisional and due to revision after proven experience.
Note 3 — For quality of service for physical delivery see § 11 of this Recommendation.		

15.6	Error protection
	Error protection on transmission is provided by the MHS and underlying protocols used in the provision of the EDI service.
15.7	Availability of service
	In principle the EDI service should be available continuously. The EDI-UA or the EDI-MS should be available for submission or delivery continuously (unless hold for delivery is invoked). In cases where the EDI-UA is not available for delivery continuously, an EDI-MS should be used.

ANNEX A
(to Recommendation F.435)
Glossary of Terms
(This Annex forms an integral part of this Recommendation)
	Note — The explanations given below are not necessarily definitions in the strict sense. See also the definitions in Annex B and the Glossary in Recommendation F.400 and terms provided in the other X.400-Series Recommendations (especially Recommendation X.435). The terms have, depending on the source, varying levels of abstraction.
A.1	EDI application
	A computer process that creates and/or processes EDI messages.
	See also § A.13.
A.2	EDI interchange
	“Communication between partners in the form of a structured set of messages and service segments starting with an interchange control header and ending with an interchange control trailer” (see ISO 9735).
	In the context of EDI messaging, the contents of the primary body part of an EDI message.
A.3	EDI message (EDIM)
	See definition in § 3 of this Recommendation.
A.4	EDI message store (EDI-MS)
	See definition in Recommendation X.435, in § 3.5.
A.5	EDI messaging (EDIMG)
	EDI messaging consists of the exchange and associated procedures of EDI messages and EDI notifications, which are information objects specified in Recommendation X.435.
A.6	EDI messaging environment (EDIME)
	The environment in which EDI messaging takes place can be modelled as a functional object which is referred to as the EDI messaging environment. When refined (i.e., functionally decomposed), the EDI messaging environment can be seen to be comprised of lesser objects referred to as the primary objects of EDI messaging. They include a single central object, the EDI messaging system, and numerous peripheral objects called EDI messaging users.
A.7	EDI messaging service
	A service that provides an EDI messaging user with features to assist in communicating with other EDI messaging users. EDI messaging users are in many cases computer processes. The EDI messaging service uses the capabilities of the message transfer service for sending and receiving EDI messages. Certain elements of service describing the features of the EDI messaging service are defined in Annex B, and classified in § 14 of this Recommendation.
A.8	EDI messaging system (EDIMS)
	The EDI messaging system is the functional object by means of which users communicate with one another in EDI messaging.
	The EDI messaging system can be modelled as comprising lesser functional objects which interact with one another. These lesser objects are referred to as the secondary objects of EDI messaging. They include a single, central object, the message transfer system, and numerous peripheral objects of three kinds: EDI user agents, EDI message stores, and EDI access units.
A.9	EDI messaging user (EDIMG user)
	See definition in § 3.3 of this Recommendation.
	Note — In the context of Recommendation X.435, for conciseness the term “user” is used with the meaning “EDIMG user”.
	See also § A.13 below.
A.10	EDI notification (EDIN)
	See definition in § 3.4 of this Recommendation.
	In EDI messaging an EDIMG user can request that a recipient return an EDI notification indicating the disposition of the EDI message it received. This notification is requested by an originating EDI user agent, and is generated by a recipient EDI user agent/message store, or access unit. There are 3 possible conditions that can be requested and reported on, resulting in either the generation of a positive notification (PN), a negative notification (NN), or a forwarded notification (FN). The one notification serves to carry either the positive notification, the negative notification, or the forwarding notification. It is possible to forward a received EDI message unchanged and forward the obligation to respond to the notification request to the forwarded recipient, or intermediate recipients, who then shall respond to the original originator of the message. An originating UA may request to be notified if the obligation to respond to the notification request has been forwarded. In this case, the UA or MS that forwards the EDI message will send to the originating UA an EDI forwarded notification.
	In all cases, including notifications sent by UAs to whom the EDI message has been forwarded, the notifications shall contain the O/R name of the recipient that was specified by the original originator.
	The originating UA may request any combination of the several EDI notifications from any combination of the recipients to whom the EDI message is sent. If no notifications are requested by an originator, none shall be sent by the recipient(s).
	EDI notifications cannot be forwarded, and EDI notifications cannot be requested for EDI notifications.
A.11	EDI message responsibility
	See definition in § 3.5 of this Recommendation.
	Note — EDIM responsibility is a trace-keeping means for confirming and tracking the passage of EDI messages among EDI user agents and EDI message stores. 
A.12	EDI security
	The MHS security capabilities as defined in Recommendation F.400, in §15 and Recommendation X.402, in § 10, are used for EDI to provide the security features for the EDI messaging system. EDI messaging system vulnerabilities and how they are countered are outlined in Annex C of this Recommendation.
A.13	EDI user
	See Recommendation X.435.
	The EDI user is an object not necessarily belonging to the EDI messaging environment. In the context of message handling, largely identical with an EDI messaging user.
	See also §§ A.1 and A.9 above, and the Note to § A.14.
A.14	EDI user agent (EDI-UA)
	See definition in Recommendation X.435, § 3.5.
	Note — An exact definition of the boundary between the EDI-UA and the EDI messaging user is beyond the scope of this Recommendation.

A.15	Electronic data interchange (EDI)
	EDI can be defined as computer to computer exchange of structured business data, such as invoices and purchase orders. In the context of the F.400-Series Recommendations, it refers to the standardized way of performing the interchange in using the protocol means of Recommendation X.435 and the service outlined in this Recommendation.
A.16	GS
	Functional group header.
	Segment name in ANSI X12.
A.17	IEA
	Interchange trailer.
	Segment name in ANSI X12.
A.18	Interchange
	See EDI interchange in A.2.
A.19	ISA
	Interchange header.
	Segment name in ANSI X12.
A.20	MHD
	Message header.
	Segment name in UNTDI.
A.21	ST
	Transaction set header.
	Segment name in ANSI X12.
A.22	STX
	Start of transmission.
	Defined in UNTDI.
A.23	UNA
	Service string advice.
	Defined in EDIFACT.
A.24	UNB
	Interchange header.
	Segment name in EDIFACT.
A.25	UNG
	Functional group header.
	Segment name in EDIFACT.
A.26	UNH
	Message header.
	Segment name in EDIFACT.
A.27	UNT
	Message trailer.
	Segment name in EDIFACT.
A.28	UNZ
	Interchange trailer.
	Segment name in EDIFACT.
ANNEX B
(to Recommendation F.435)
Definitions of Elements of Service

(This Annex forms an integral part of this Recommendation)
	This Annex contains definitions for the elements of service unique to EDI messaging. It does not contain definitions for those elements of service of the MT service applicable to EDI messaging. Those are contained in Recommendation F.400, Annex B. The abbreviation PR in the title line means that this element of service is available to be used on a per-recipient basis.The numbering for EDI elements of service uses, for ease of reference, and to distinguish them from message transfer and IPM elements of service, the abbreviation “EDI.n”.
B.1	application security element EDI.1
	Element of service that allows the originator and the recipient to indicate in the heading of the EDI message application security information in order to support end-to-end security services.
B.2	character set EDI.2
	Element of service that allows the originator to indicate in the heading of an EDI message, the character set used in the EDI body of the message.
B.3	cross reference information EDI.3
	Element of service that allows the originator to indicate in the heading of an EDI message, information that can be used for cross referencing between application specified reference IDs within an EDI interchange and body parts of this or other EDI messages.
B.4	EDI forwarding EDI.4
	Element of service that enables an EDI-UA to forward with or without changes, and an EDI-MS to forward without changes, a received EDIM. Support of the element of service “EDIN receiver” is also required when forwarding.

B.5	EDI message type(s) EDI.5
	Element of service that allows the originator to indicate in the heading of an EDI message the type(s) of EDI messages contained in the EDI interchange (e.g., invoices, purchase orders, etc.).
B.6	EDI notification request EDI.6	PR
	Element of service that allows the originating EDI-UA to request that it be notified of a recipient's acceptance, refusal or forwarding of EDIM responsibility, in any combination, for the message carrying this request. The originating EDI-UA conveys this request to the recipient EDI-UA/MS/AU. 
	If the recipient EDI-UA/MS accepts EDIM responsibility for the message it issues a positive notification (PN) back to the originator of the message and no further notifications are issued back to this originator for this message. 
	In the case where the recipient EDI-UA/MS does not accept EDIM responsibility and successfully forwards the message with content unchanged, the forwarded recipient UA/MS, or optionally any intermediate UAs/MSs, has the same obligations as the first recipient UA/MS with respect to responding to this request, and the response is due to the original originator of the message. A forwarding notification (FN) is sent back to the originator.
	If the recipient EDI-UA/MS/AU refuses EDIM responsibility for the message, or is unable to successfully forward the message, it issues a negative notification (NN) back to the originator of the message, with a reason indicated. Reasons for refusing EDIM responsibility for the message are as follows:
1)	the EDI interchange could not be passed over to the EDIMG user;
2)	the EDI interchange could not be passed over to the EDIMG user within a specified time limit;
3)	the message was discarded before processing;
4)	the recipient's subscription was terminated after delivery but before responding;
5)	EDI forwarding and forwarding of EDIM responsibility was attempted, but failed;
6)	PDAU could not render the message;
7)	security error;
8)	unspecified local reasons;
	In the case of physical delivery access units, a PN is not meaningful, so a forwarded notification (FN) is returned to the originator instead of a PN.
	A negative notification indicates that this message shall not be made available to the EDIMG user and implies that the EDIM shall not be processed by an EDI application.
	Subject to the security policy, the capabilities of the message store may be restricted, e.g., when a secure notification is requested, the message store shall not be allowed to generate a PN.
B.7	EDI standard indication EDI.7
	Element of service that enables the originating EDI-UA to indicate in the heading of an EDI message the type of EDI standard that is being used in this EDI message (e.g., EDIFACT, etc).
B.8	EDI message Identification EDI.8
	Element of service that enables cooperating EDI-UAs to convey a globally unique identifier for each EDI message sent or received. The EDI message identifier is composed of an O/R name of the originator and an identifier that is unique with respect to that name. EDI-UAs and EDIMG users use this identifier to refer to a previously sent or received EDI message (for example, in EDI notifications).

B.9	EDIM responsibility forwarding allowed indication EDI.9	PR
	Element of service that allows an originating EDI-UA to indicate that the EDIM responsibility for this EDI message may be forwarded on by the recipient EDI-UA.
B.10	EDIN receiver EDI.10
	Element of service that allows the originator, or a forwarding EDI-UA/MS, to indicate to a recipient the O/R address that requested notifications should be returned to.
B.11	expiry date/time indication EDI.11
	Element of service that allows the originator to indicate to the recipient the date and time after which the originator considers the EDI message to be invalid. The intent of this element of service is to state the originator's assessment of the current applicability of an EDI message. The particular action by the recipient, or by the recipient's EDI-UA, is unspecified. Possible actions might be to file or delete the EDI message after the expiry date has passed. 
B.12	incomplete copy indication EDI.12
	Element of service that allows a forwarding EDI-UA to indicate that the forwarded EDI message is an incomplete copy of an EDI message with the same EDI message identification in that one or more body parts of the original EDI message are absent.
B.13	interchange header EDI.13
	Element of service that enables the originating EDI-UA to place data elements of the EDI interchange headers in corresponding fields in the EDIM.
B.14	multi-part body EDI.14
	Element of service that allows an originator to send to a recipient an EDI message with a body that is comprised of several parts. The nature and attributes, or type, of each body part are conveyed along with the body part.
B.15	non-repudiation of content originated EDI.15
	Element of service that enables an originating EDI-UA to provide a recipient EDI-UA with an irrevocable proof as to the authenticity and integrity of the content of the message as it was submitted into the MH environment.
	The corresponding proof data can be supplied in two ways depending on the security policy in force:
1)	Using the Non-repudiation of Origin Security service applied to the original message or,
2)	By means of a notarization mechanism.
	Note — Use of a notarization mechanism is not reflected in protocol elements, but is subject to bilateral agreement.
B.16	non-repudiation of content received EDI.16	PR
	Element of service that enables an originating EDI-UA to get from a recipient EDI-UA an irrevocable proof that the original subject message content was received by the recipient EDI-UA and EDIM responsibility was accepted, forwarded or refused. This service provides irrevocable proof as to the integrity of the content received and irrevocable proof as to the authenticity of the recipient of the message. It will protect against any attempt by the recipient(s) to subsequently deny having received the message content. This service is stronger than the “Proof of Content Received” service.

	The corresponding proof data can be supplied in two ways depending on the security policy in force:
1)	By returning a “non-repudiation of origin” of the “EDI notification” which incorporates the following:
—	the originator's “non-repudiation of origin” arguments (if present),
—	the complete original message content, if the originator's “non-repudiation of origin” arguments are not present.
2)	By means of a notarization mechanism.
Note — Use of a notarization mechanism is not reflected in protocol elements, but is subject to bilateral agreement.
B.17	non-repudiation of content received request EDI.17	PR
	Element of service that enables the originating EDI-UA to request the recipient EDI-UA to provide it with an irrevocable proof of the received message content by means of an EDI notification.
	Note — This element of service requires the “EDI notification request” also to be present.
B.18	non-repudiation of EDI notification EDI.18	PR
	Element of service that provides the originator of a message with irrevocable proof that the subject message was received by the recipient EDI-UA and EDIM responsibility was accepted, forwarded or refused.
	This shall protect against any attempt by the recipient EDI-UA to deny subsequently that the message was received and that the EDIM responsibility for the message has been accepted as indicated. This element of service provides the originator with irrevocable proof of the “proof of EDI notification”.
	Such a proof may be provided by means of the “Non-repudiation of Origin” Security service, currently defined in Recommendation X.402 in § 10.2.5.1, applied to the notification.
	This service is stronger than the “Proof of EDI Notification” service.
B.19	non-repudiation of EDI notification request EDI.19	PR
	Element of service, used in conjunction with “EDI notification request”, that enables the originating EDI-UA to request the responding EDI-UA to provide it with irrevocable proof of the origin of the notification. 
	Note — This element of service supersedes the “Proof of EDI notification request” and assumes that “EDI Notification Request” is already present.
B.20	obsoleting indication EDI.20
	Element of service that allows the originator to indicate to the recipient that one or more EDI messages previously sent by the originator are obsolete. The EDI message that carries this indication supersedes the obsolete EDI message(s).
	The action to be taken by the recipient or the recipient's EDI-UA is a local matter. The intent, however, is to allow the EDI-UA or the recipient to, for example, remove or file an obsolete message(s).
B.21	originator indication EDI.21
	Element of service that allows the identity of the originator to be conveyed to the recipient. 
B.22	proof of content received EDI.22	PR
	Element of service that allows an originating EDI-UA to get from a recipient EDI-UA proof that the original subject message content was received by the recipient EDI-UA and EDIM responsibility was accepted, forwarded or refused.

	The corresponding proof is obtained by returning a proof of origin of the EDI notification which incorporates the originator's message origin authentication and/or content integrity arguments, if present, or the complete original message content otherwise.
B.23	proof of content received request EDI.23	PR
	Element of service that enables the originating EDI-UA to request the recipient EDI-UA to provide it with proof of the received message content by means of an EDI notification.
	Note — This element of service requires the “EDI notification request” to also be present.
B.24	proof of EDI notification EDI.24	PR
	Element of service that allows the originator of a message to obtain the means to corroborate that the subject message was received by the recipient EDI-UA and EDIM responsibility was accepted, forwarded or refused. Such a corroboration is provided by means of the MTS user-to-MTS user “Message Origin Authentication” Security service, currently defined in Recommendation X.402, § 10.2.1.1.1, applied to the EDI notification.
B.25	proof of EDI notification request EDI.25	PR
	Element of service, used in conjunction with “EDI notification request”, that enables the originating EDI-UA to request the responding EDI-UA to provide it with a corroboration of the source of the EDI notification. 
	Note — This element of service assumes that “EDI notification request” is already present.
B.26	recipient indication EDI.26	PR
	Element of service that allows the originator to provide the names of one or more EDIMG users, or DLs, who are intended recipients of the EDI message. In addition it is possible to specify an action request qualifier for each recipient, such as;
1)	for action;
2)	copy;
3)	other, as defined bilaterally.
	Note — The qualifier represents intent on the part of the originator with respect to the EDIM, however the recipient is not necessarily bound by this intent.
B.27	related message(s) EDI.27
	This element of service that allows the originator to associate with the EDI message being sent, the globally unique identifiers of one or more other messages which share the same identification space (e.g., IP-messages). This enables the recipient's EDI-UA, for example, to retrieve from storage a copy of the referenced messages.
B.28	services indication EDI.28
	Element of service that allows the originator to indicate in the heading of the EDI message various service requests to service suppliers that have bilateral meaning outside this Recommendation.
B.29	stored EDI message auto-forward EDI.29
	Element of service that allows a user of an EDI-MS to have the message store automatically perform EDI forwarding, with or without accepting EDIM responsibility. The user of the EDI-MS may establish criteria for selecting EDIMs through use of the element of service “MS register”. The complete EDIM, as received from the 
originator, is forwarded unchanged, and if requested, an appropriate EDIN is generated by the EDI-MS. EDIM responsibility forwarding is limited to only one recipient. Support of the element of service “EDIN receiver” is also required when forwarding.
	Subject to the requirements of the security policy in force, the capabilities of the message store may be restricted, e.g., when a secure notification is requested, the message store shall not be allowed to generate a PN.
B.30	typed body EDI.30
	Element of service that permits the nature and characteristics of the body of an EDI message to be conveyed along with the body. Permissible body part types are EDI body, forwarded EDIM body, and externally defined body parts.
ANNEX C
(to Recommendation F.435)
Security Overview

(This Annex does not form an integral part of this Recommendation)
C.1	Introduction
	This Annex details the vulnerabilities identified within an EDIME and the resulting security services required to counter those vulnerabilities.
	This Annex is based on the assumption that an EDIME may use the secure messaging services as defined in Recommendation F.400. However, where vulnerabilities are not adequately covered by the existing MHS security services, provision has been made in Recommendation X.435 for additional security services in the EDIME.
	Some of the security services defined for the EDIME are of a generic message handling nature, others are specific to the EDIME. The security services defined for the EDIME are specific to EDIMG and are therefore fully defined in Recommendation X.435.
C.2	Vulnerabilities
	In most of the areas identified below, there will also be further vulnerabilities and corresponding service considerations at the level of the EDI applications (i.e., EDIMG users). The security model reflected in this paper assumes that such considerations are outside the scope of this Recommendation. The EDIMG security model assumes that the EDIMG user provides adequate security and trusted functionality in the operation of EDI applications sufficient to meet the user's security policy.
	Note — In practice this may necessitate co-location of the EDI application and the EDI-UA unless a suitably secure environment is established which includes both components.
	The following description of vulnerabilities is based on the threat definitions in Annex D of Recommendation X.402. In addition, it has been considered necessary to examine message loss independently of message sequencing and modification of information, and to take account of further vulnerabilities for EDIMG which are not currently identified in Recommendation X.402.
	An important aspect of the EDI environment which is not recognised within the Recommendation X.402 security model is the concept of EDIM responsibility for messages at each stage of the message path through the MHS environment.

	In an EDI context, the increased possibility of a number of service providers offering commercial services may require that the forwarding of EDIM responsibility be clearly identified and assured to provide further protection, not only to end users but also to such service providers.
	It is therefore necessary to establish the concept of EDIM responsibility domains, which may involve additional consideration of legal issues. One possible division of the EDIME into EDIM responsibility domains is as follows:
—	EDIMG user environment plus the EDI-UA;
—	MTS management domain;
—	EDI message store (if not co-located with either of the above).
C.2.1	Masquerade
	As defined in Recommendation X.402, Annex D.
C.2.2	Message sequencing
	As defined in Recommendation X.402, Annex D.
	Users should not assume that EDIMs shall be delivered in correct sequence. EDI applications should be able to recover from duplication and out-of-sequence messages, provided that MHS offers protection against the modification of information while messages are within the MHS environment.
C.2.3	Message loss
	Vulnerability to message loss is considered critical in the EDIMG environment.
	Two types of message loss are distinguished:
—	catastrophic failure of an EDI-UA, EDI-MS or MTA,
—	loss of individual message(s).
	EDIME users and service providers may need to consider more carefully issues concerning transfer of messages between EDIM responsibility domains:
—	from the originating EDI-UA user domain;
—	between relaying domains;
—	to the recipient EDI-UA user domain.
C.2.4	Modification of information
	As defined in Recommendation X.402, Annex D.
C.2.5	Denial of service
	As defined in Recommendation X.402, Annex D.
C.2.6	Repudiation
	As defined in Recommendation X.402, Annex D.
	Furthermore repudiation vulnerability in the EDIME environment is considered to be critical. Such vulnerability may be increased by use of certain MHS services (e.g., auto-forwarding, redirection).
C.2.7	Leakage of information
	As defined in Recommendation X.402, Annex D.

C.2.8	Manipulation of information by EDIMG user
	The EDI community has additionally identified a further vulnerability where the integrity of a message content is altered subsequent to EDI interchange (i.e., by either or both of the originating EDI-UA and recipient EDI-UA). This vulnerability includes manipulation of message content in the originator's local store after non-repudiation of submission and/or manipulation of message content in the recipient's store after non-repudiation of delivery.
C.2.9	Other vulnerabilities
	Other vulnerabilities as defined in Recommendation X.402 are considered important such as:
—	misrouting;
—	misdelivery (especially important in the context of redirection);
—	insider threats;
—	receipt of data that the EDI application is not prepared to accept.
C.3	Vulnerabilities countered
	Recommendation X.402, §10 provides an abstract security model for Message Transfer. The security model provides a framework for describing security services that counter potential vulnerabilities within the MTS and between MTS-User to MTS-User. EDIMG vulnerabilities may also be countered by security services which are outside the existing model in Recommendation X.402. The following text describes how the EDIM vulnerabilities are countered using Recommendation X.402 security services, enhanced security services defined in Recommendation X.435 and pervasive mechanisms defined in this Recommendation.
C.3.1 	Masquerade
	The existing MHS security services which counter this vulnerability are:
—	message origin authentication;
—	secure access management;
—	security labelling;
—	proof of delivery;
—	proof of submission.
	Since an EDI-UA/MS is deemed in the MHS architecture as belonging to one user, it is not considered appropriate to provide selective access control for the various operations that may be performed on a EDI-MS. However, there is a requirement for security audit trail to record the actions of the EDIMG user.
	In this Recommendation such security audit trails are expected to be implemented as pervasive mechanisms (the term pervasive mechanism is defined in ISO 7498-2). Protocols to support audit capability may be the subject of future standardization.
C.3.2 	Message sequencing
	The existing MHS Security service which counters this vulnerability is:
—	message sequence integrity.
	This security service has limited effect as it is based on the provision of an integer by the originating EDI-UA with no assurance as to uniqueness or consecutiveness.
	It is considered that the MHS environment should not be required to ensure message sequence integrity, but should support detection of sequence integrity failure (by additional provision of audit/logging facilities and/or the provision of third party notary services). In this Recommendation it is considered the responsibility of the EDIMG user to recover from sequence errors and message duplication.

C.3.3 	Message loss
	Message loss could occur potentially over any peer-to-peer communications link (e.g., by deliberate malicious act), or by the failure or incorrect behaviour (whether by malicious intent or otherwise) of any MHS component (EDI-UA, EDI-MS, MTA). The following categories of message loss are distinguished:
—	catastrophic message loss (i.e. failure of a component);
—	loss of individual messages in the EDI-MS — whether malicious or accidental;
—	MTS message loss.
C.3.3.1	Catastrophic failure
	Failure of the EDI-UA is outside the scope of this Recommendation.
	Failure of the EDI-MS is potentially catastrophic and desirably needs some protection, at least in terms of detection. This should be provided by an offline archive to hold all submitted and delivered messages. In this Recommendation detection and recovery from message loss using such archive mechanisms is a local matter.
	Failure of any component in the MTS may similarly be catastrophic and can again be protected by offline archive of messages. As for the message store, detection and recovery from message loss using such archive mechanisms in the MTS is a local matter and outside the scope of this Recommendation.
C.3.3.2	 EDI-MS specific message loss
	Loss of individual messages in the message store — whether malicious or accidental — shall require the provision of a secure audit trail to enable detection of such loss. Such a service may need to be provided to the EDIMG user and to EDI-MS management. In this Recommendation, secure EDI-MS audit trail could be realized as a pervasive mechanism and is a local issue. Protocol to support an audit trail may be the subject of future standardization.
C.3.3.3 	MTS specific message loss
	Loss of individual messages in the MTS (whether malicious or accidental) shall also require the provision of a secure audit trail to enable detection of such loss. Such a mechanism would need to be provided on a per-MTA and a per-MD basis depending on security policy in force. A secure MTA/MTS audit trail could be realized as a pervasive mechanism and is a local issue. The protocol to support an audit trail may be the subject of future standardization.
C.3.3.4	End-to-end message loss
	The following description assumes that the functionality of the EDI-UA (including any associated components to meet such functionality — e.g., encryption devices) is trusted.
	The existing “Message Sequence Integrity” service does not guarantee detection of message loss, since it relies on the provision of an integer value by the originating EDI-UA. In practice, effective operation of this service may be achieved with a common code of practice between EDIMG users which is outside the scope of this Recommendation.
	As a result, MHS services which may provide an indication of message loss are confined to services offered to the originating EDIMG user. Whereas, the existing “Proof of Submission and Delivery” services provide some degree of confidence that the message has not been lost they do not operate end-to-end. In particular they do not take account of the scenario where the recipient EDI-UA and EDI-MS are not co-located. There is therefore a requirement for a Proof of Receipt (i.e., by the recipient EDI-UA) service. This capability is realized by the user requesting an EDI notification which may be secured. The EDI notification indicating the status of EDIM responsibility as accepted, forwarded or refused includes elements which associates the notification with the subject message. 
	In an EDIMG environment proof of receipt may therefore be provided by signing the EDI Notification service using the existing MTS security elements. In particular the EDI-UA to EDI-UA Security service of “message origin authentication” may be used to sign the EDI notification on submission of the EDI notification to the MTS. In this Recommendation the requirement for proof of receipt may be implemented by a trusted form of EDI notification in the EDIMG environment.

	Note — This service is called “proof of EDI notification” and/or “non-repudiation of EDI notification” in EDIMG depending on the strength of the mechanism provided.
	The MTS mechanism used on message submission to provide this service is defined as the MTS submission abstract operation in Recommendation X.411, § 8.2.1.1.1.28 “Content-integrity-check”. In this instance the message content is the EDI notification. Proof of association between the subject message and replying EDI notification is provided by subject message EDI identifier and if included in the subject message the message content-integrity-check argument.
C.3.4	Modification of information
	The existing MHS security services which counter this vulnerability are:
—	connection integrity;
—	content integrity.
	These security services provide sufficient protection against modification of message content. It is also noted that use of double enveloping (i.e., with encrypted checksum on outer envelope) may provide additional protection.
	Note — EDI-UAs are trusted entities in terms of content integrity.
C.3.5 	Denial of service
	This is a very important vulnerability for EDIMG users, but is outside the scope of this Recommendation.
C.3.6	Repudiation
	Services which offer protection against repudiation in the EDIMG environment are fundamentally concerned with formalizing the forwarding of EDIM responsibility.
	The security services as defined in Recommendation X.402 are:
—	non-repudiation of origin;
—	non-repudiation of submission ;
—	non-repudiation of delivery.
	These security services only cover some areas of transfer between EDIM responsibility domains, which may be of significance in an EDIMG environment (as illustrated in Figure C.1/F.435). Areas which are not covered by security services provided in 1988 for message handling include:
—	between EDIMG user domains (i.e., end-to-end);
—	between MTS management domains;
between an EDI message store and a recipient EDI-UA.
	Therefore services and/or pervasive mechanisms defined in this Recommendation cover the above deficiencies:
—	non-repudiation/proof of transfer;
—	non-repudiation/proof of retrieval;
—	non-repudiation/proof of edi notification;
—	non-repudiation/proof of content.
Fig. C-1/F.435 = 13.5 cm

	“Non-repudiation/proof of transfer” counters the vulnerability of repudiation of responsibility between MTA and/or management domains. EDIMG environments may provide such a service using additional pervasive mechanisms, such as security logs and archives within MTA and/or MTS boundaries. Such pervasive mechanisms provide a “secure MT audit trail” to record the message details and trace information.
	“Non-repudiation/proof of retrieval” counters the vulnerability of repudiation of responsibility of a message between a UA and an MS. EDIMG environments may provide such a service using additional pervasive mechanisms, such as security logs and archives within EDI-MSs. Such pervasive mechanisms provide a “secure EDI-MS audit trail” to record EDIMG user actions in the EDI message store.
	“Non-repudiation/proof of EDI notification” counters the vulnerability of repudiation of an EDI notification EDI-UA to EDI-UA. This service is specific to EDIMG and a complete solution is included in this Recommendation. This vulnerability may be especially relevant in the case of EDI forwarding, redirection, etc, in addition to the scenario of delivery to an untrusted EDI message store.
	Two mechanisms have been defined for non-repudiation of EDI notifications, the first uses the trusted EDI notification as described above, the second using an external notary systems. Only the trusted EDI notification was fully defined in this Recommendation. External notary systems may be the subject of future standardization.

	“Non-repudiation/proof of content” counters the vulnerability of manipulation of information by the EDIMG user after the message has been received by the EDI-UA. Although such vulnerability is outside the MHS environment, the MHS environment may provide assistance in terms of trusted return of content and notarization services. There are several ways this requirement may be supported, using the secure messaging environment based on the security services provided in 1988.
	Firstly non-repudiation of content by the originating EDI-UA may be provided by the existing “Non‑repudiation of Origin” Security service. 
	Secondly non-repudiation of content by the recipient EDI-UA may be provided by returning the subject content within the EDI notification and submitting the EDI notification to the MTS using the “Non-repudiation of Origin” Security services.
	Thirdly by notarization services, such services may be achieved by forwarding messages via a mutually trusted third-party notary (i.e., using existing MHS security services). 
	All three approaches would thus require no modification to the secure messaging environment based on the existing MHS Recommendations.
	Note — Non-repudiation services (which may imply the involvement of a third party) are considered stronger than “proof-of” services.
C.3.7 	Leakage of information
	The existing MHS security services which counter this vulnerability are:
—	connection confidentiality;
—	content confidentiality;
—	secure access management;
—	message flow confidentiality.
	These security services provide sufficient protection against leakage of message content. It is also noted that use of double enveloping could provide some protection against traffic analysis. Traffic padding is outside the scope of this area of work.
	Note — UAs are trusted entities in terms of content and message flow confidentiality.
C.3.8 	Manipulation of information by EDIMG user
	Manipulation of information by the EDIMG user may by countered by use of the “Non-repudiation of Content” Security service.
C.3.9 	Other vulnerabilities
	The use of “security access management” and “security labelling” to counter all other vulnerabilities is also applicable in the EDIMG environment. In addition, there is a requirement for auditing and accountability which is likely to require at least a “secure audit trail”, this may be provided by a pervasive mechanism as a local matter.
C.3.10 	Other EDI application vulnerabilities
	Within the EDIMG environment the EDI application itself may be vulnerable to security threats. To counter these vulnerabilities the EDI application may wish to generate its own security services and mechanisms (such as, signatures from EDI application to EDI application). These EDI application security services are conveyed in EDIMS security fields as purely information conveying elements of services within the EDIMG environment and may consequently be used for several end to end services including message recovery and non-repudiation. It is a local issue to determine how the EDI application security services are used.

C.3.11 	Summary
	This Annex identifies EDIMG vulnerabilities and the security services necessary to counter those vulnerabilities using MHS specification of 1988, then specifies the corresponding security elements required. 
—	EDIMG may provide additional pervasive mechanisms as follows:
—	secure EDI-MS audit trail,
—	secure MT audit trail;
—	EDI-MS archive;
—	MD archive;
—	security of MTA management and routing information.
	This Recommendation currently allows the use of both standard symmetric and standard asymmetric tokens. The use of trusted notary systems may be the subject of future standardization. 
C.4	Additional pervasive mechanisms
C.4.1	Secure EDI-MS audit trail
	This facility would monitor and record EDI-UA actions on the message store. It would also provide support for “proof of retrieval”.
	It is strongly recommended that "secure EDI-MS audit trail" should be controlled via a secure link or other secure local means to protect against masquerade. In this Recommendation "secure EDI-MS audit trail" may only be realized as a pervasive mechanism. The pervasive mechanisms mentioned may be the subject of future standardization.
C.4.2	Secure MT audit trail
	This facility would monitor and record all MTA actions. It would also provide additional support for: “proof of submission”, “proof of transfer”, “proof of delivery”, security of the administration of the MTA.
	In this Recommendation secure MT audit trail may be realized as a pervasive mechanism.
C.4.3	EDI-MS archive
	This mechanism is potentially useful for providing recovery from MS failure i.e., by providing a secure offline archive of all submitted and delivered messages. Detection and recovery from message loss using such archive mechanism is a local matter.
C.4.4	MT Archive
	This mechanism is potentially useful for providing recovery from MTA failure i.e., by providing a secure offline archive of all messages. Detection and recovery from message loss using such archive mechanism is a local matter.

ANNEX D
(to Recommendation F.435)
EDI naming, addressing, and use of directory

(This Annex does not form an integral part of this Recommendation)
	This Annex describes the use of the Directory by the EDI messaging service. While the Directory may be used by any EDI user, this Annex is limited to the use of the Directory by an EDIMG user.
D.1	Introduction
	This Annex describes the functions that an EDIMG user may obtain from the Directory, if the Directory is available to the EDIMG user. If the Directory is not available, the functions described in this Annex may be performed as a local matter.
	This Annex covers the following topics:
a)	EDI naming in § D.2;
b)	suggested DIT structure for EDI in § D.3;
c)	name resolution in § D.4;
d)	authentication in § D.5;
e)	capabilities assessment in § D.6.
D.2	EDI naming
	EDI users (trading partners) identify each other by a “name” which is essentially an arbitrary alphanumeric string. In this Annex an EDI name is defined to be such an alphanumeric string. EDI standards authorities (for example EDIFACT and ANSI X12) define specific instances of EDI names. The EDI name is normally unique within a particular EDI community, but may not be globally.
	The EDI communities may be organized
a)	by industry group (e.g., CEFIC, EDIFICE);
b)	as a private trading group of a large corporation;
c)	around a third-party EDI service provider.
	The EDI names used by any of the above community types are one of the following forms:
d)	A formalized name issued by an internationally recognized naming authority (e.g., DUNS, EAN, SIRET) which is globally unique.
e)	A formalized name issued by a multi-national company; the name is unique within the company's trading community and the multi-national company acts as a naming authority within this community.
f)	a free form name assigned by the trading partners themselves, subject only to a uniqueness check by the organizer or operator of the community, acting in the role of a naming authority.
	Note — All these name forms exist today, and it will take some time for EDIMG users to migrate to globally unique naming.
	EDI standards allow the use of a qualifier together with the EDI name. The qualifier identifies the naming authority that assigned or endorsed the alphanumeric string. Globally unique EDI naming is achieved by using EDI names with the appropriate qualifier code.
	There is no geographic element in an EDI name, such as country of operation.

	The EDIMG users send EDI interchanges with as little addressing information as possible. The EDI name is a static entity which exists for a long period, unlike an address which may change from time to time. 
D.3	Suggested DIT structure for EDI
	Annex B of Recommendation X.521 suggests some common naming practices and DIT structures in which locality, country and root can be immediately superior to entries of the object class organization.
	When organization is immediately subordinate to root it denotes an international organization. The community types identified in § D.2 operate internationally, and therefore, the majority of these community types may be classified as international organizations.
	A Directory structure is suggested in which each community of EDI names is grouped under the organization that serves as naming authority for that community (company, industry group, service provider). In this case the entry associated with each EDI name is an alias entry; actual entry for the EDIMG user is elsewhere in the DIT, as described in § D.4.
	Figure D-1/F.435 illustrates a DIT structure which accommodates the requirements of the EDI community. A new generic object class, EDI user, is created. The attributes in its entry identify the name of the EDIMG user, and to the extent that they are present, the capabilities of the EDIMG user and the attributes of a message handling user as defined in Recommendation X.402.
	Note — Figure D-1/F.435 illustrates the directory information tree (DIT) that is implied by the object class EDI user as defined in Annex J of Recommendation X.435.
Fig. D-1/F.435 = 13.5 cm

D.4	Name resolution
	An EDIMG user may use the Directory to obtain the message handling O/R address of the EDI-UA corresponding to another EDIMG user. This process is defined as “name resolution” in § 22 of Recommenda-
tion X.402.
	To obtain the message handling O/R address of an EDI-UA that corresponds to an EDIMG user whose Directory name it possesses, an EDIMG user presents the Directory name to the Directory, and obtains from the Directory the attribute message handling O/R address.
	To do this successfully, the EDIMG user shall authenticate itself to the Directory and have access rights to the information requested.
	The Directory name may contain a relative distinguished name that is an EDI name. The EDI name can be considered a “user friendly name”, as defined in § E.1 of Annex E of Recommendation X.501.
	Figure D-27F.435, which is similar to Figure E-1/X.501, illustrates an example of an EDI name. Whenever an EDI‑UA requires access to an EDIMG user Directory entry, using the services of a DUA, it shall construct the distinguished name of the entry. The distinguished name shall contain the EDI name, organization name of the organization or naming authority that issued the EDI name, and if required, the country of that organization. How the EDIMG user obtains the EDI name is a local matter. The EDIMG user shall pass the EDI name to the EDI-UA, who shall pass it to the DUA. When the EDI name is globally unique, the organization name, and if required, country, may be derived from the qualifier code with the EDI name. When the EDI name is not globally unique, the EDIMG user or EDI-UA shall obtain the organization name and shall obtain the country, if required, via other means.
Fig. D-2/F.435 = 12.5 cm

	An alias name may be used to direct the search for a particular entry, for example, to enter the Directory with an organization name and the EDI name in order to extract an message handling O/R address. Figure D-2/F.435 shows an EDI-UA identified with the name (O=Multinational, EU=Invoicing). It is also identified by (C=US, O=Telecom EDI, EU=Invoicing). Both EDIMG user names resolve to the same message handling O/R address (C=US, A=SomeADMD, P=Telco, O=Telecom EDI, CN=Invoices).
	Figure D-3/F.435 illustrates that if the organization is not an international organization then the EDIMG user can still be accessed using country as a component of its name.
Fig. D-3/F.435 = 14 cm

D.5	Authentication
	An EDIMG user may accomplish authentication using information stored in the Directory. This usage is as defined in Recommendations X.400 and X.509.

D.6	Capabilities assessment
	An EDIMG user may assess the capabilities of another EDIMG user via the Directory. Capability assessment allows the EDIMG user to determine, for example, whether the other EDIMG user can process a specific version or release of an EDI document.
	The following Directory attributes represent EDI capabilities in the EDI messaging service:
a)	standard;
b)	standard version;
c)	standard syntax identifier;
d)	document type;
e)	document version;
f)	document release;
g)	controlling agency;
h)	association assigned code;
i)	EDI character set;
	To assess a particular capability of an EDIMG user whose Directory name it possesses, the EDIMG user shall present that name to the Directory and request from the Directory the attribute EDI capabilities.
	To do this successfully, the EDIMG user shall first authenticate itself to the Directory, and have access rights to the information requested.
ANNEX E
(to Recommendation F.435)
Cross Referencing Overview

(This Annex does not form an integral part of this Recommendation)
	EDIMG users have a need to reference other body parts from within the EDI interchange. For example, an EDI purchase order may refer to a drawing contained in another body part, either within that EDIM or within another message. The element of service “cross reference information” can be used to satisfy this requirement. This element of service corresponds to an EDIM heading field specifically designed to contain cross reference information. The EDI user arbitrarily chooses an application cross reference ID. The EDI-UA then uses information supplied by the EDIMG user to pair this cross reference ID with a globally unique body part ID and stores both in the cross reference heading field.
	The identifier for the body part can take different forms. It may be the sequence number of the body part within the EDIM, if the body part is contained within the EDIM. If the body part is contained in some other EDIM or IP-message, it shall be a globally unique identifier formed by concatenating the EDI message ID or IP-message ID and the body part number.
	An EDIMG user wishing to correlate a body part with an application cross reference ID found within an EDI interchange uses the application cross reference ID to perform a lookup in the cross reference information. It finds the corresponding body part ID in the data, and this can then be used to locate and extract that body part.

	The EDIMG user shall supply to the EDI-UA the information required to create the cross reference information when it requests the EDI-UA to create the EDIM. Similarly, the EDIMG user can use the cross reference data when processing a received EDIM.
	For informative purposes only, Figure E-1/F.435 illustrates the proposed mechanism. In this example, body part 2, a drawing, is referenced from within the EDI interchange in the primary body part, thus enabling a correlation between a particular line item in the purchase order and an engineering drawing. The application reference ID is "12345".
	If the EDIM is forwarded with no changes or body parts added, then all cross reference information is valid and the ultimate recipient EDI-UA can take the appropriate actions.
Fig. E-1/F.435 = 10.5 cm