If you need SWIFTNetLink to transfer messages you may want to consider writing a transport. You can use message Formatters/Builders when the wire message come from a transport like HTTP.
Thanks, Supun.. On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 12:30 AM, Chaamini Mangaleswaran <[email protected]>wrote: > I guess therefore message builder and message formatter for SWIFT MT > messages would meet the requirement. > > * > > > > Thanks & Regards, > * > *Chaamini* > * > > * > * > Keep Smiling ! > * > > > On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 11:52 PM, Andreas Veithen < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 6:38 PM, Chaamini Mangaleswaran >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Hi Hiranya, >> > >> > I read SWIFT Specifications and I found out the following : >> > >> > An organization has to connect to SWIFTNet to connect with all the >> > institutions participating. SWIFTNetLink is a mandatory software >> product >> > for the users of SWIFTNet. This provides the technical interoperability >> > between users by providing the minimal functionality required to >> communicate >> > over swift services. >> > >> > SWIFTNet Link provides a set of XML-based APIs, to connect the local >> > application with the remote application and with the SWIFTNet. >> > >> > Therefore I think basically SWIFT will be a content exchange format like >> > XML. I couldn't find supporting material which >> > >> > requires to >> > support a new application layer protocol to integrate SWIFT as you >> > mentioned. >> > Therefore as from my findings I think a message builder and formatter >> > suffice the requirement. >> > >> > Another concern I came across was, though WIFE supports SWIFT MT >> standards >> > (ISO 15022), there is another emerging XML based standard for SWIFT >> called >> > SWIFT MX standards ( ISO 20022). This is not supported by WIFE yet >> > >> > and >> > I couldn't find any other open source SWIFT Framework which addresses >> this >> > need. >> > I am not aware of any possible >> > alternative >> > ways >> > to incorporate >> > XML based >> > SWIFT MX Standards >> > at the moment. >> >> If these new messages are already XML based, then I guess that they >> don't need any kind of translation/transformation when entering or >> exiting the Synapse runtime. >> >> > I would like hear your thoughts regarding this issue too. >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Thanks & Regards, >> > Chaamini >> > >> > Keep Smiling ! >> > >> > >> > On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 3:40 AM, Hiranya Jayathilaka < >> [email protected]> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> The real question is whether SWIFT is an application layer protocol >> (like >> >> HTTP) or just a content exchange format (like XML). You should >> probably look >> >> into the SWIFT specification and figure out an answer to this >> question. The >> >> type of implementation required depends on the answer. If it is an >> >> application layer protocol then we need a transport. But if it's just a >> >> content exchange format that runs on existing application layer >> protocols, >> >> we only need a message builder and a formatter. >> >> >> >> It's also possible that we need both. HL7 is a good example to such a >> >> scenario. HL7 integration requires supporting an application layer >> protocol >> >> known an SMPP. But it can also work on existing protocols such as HTTP >> by >> >> leveraging HL7 message formats. So we need a transport as well as a >> >> builder/formatter in that case. Perhaps SWIFT also falls into that >> category. >> >> >> >> Let us know what you can find out from the SWIFT specs. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Hiranya >> >> >> >> On May 5, 2013, at 9:12 PM, Chaamini Mangaleswaran <[email protected] >> > >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi All, >> >> >> >> I am trying to develop a new feature for Apache Synapse to support >> SWIFT >> >> Protocol. As the initial step I am trying to use the JMS transport >> already >> >> available and build a message builder and message formatter, which can >> >> convert SWIFT messages to XML and vice versa. For this conversion I am >> >> trying to use the open source SWIFT message management framework called >> >> WIFE. >> >> But there is another approach to implement it as a standalone transport >> >> protocol by using Apache Mina and a transport sender and receiver. >> Will the >> >> first approach will be sufficient to meet the requirement ?I would >> like to >> >> hear your thoughts on this idea! >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> Thanks & Regards, >> >> Chaamini >> >> >> >> Keep Smiling ! >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Hiranya Jayathilaka >> >> Mayhem Lab/RACE Lab; >> >> Dept. of Computer Science, UCSB; http://cs.ucsb.edu >> >> E-mail: [email protected]; Mobile: +1 (805) 895-7443 >> >> Blog: http://techfeast-hiranya.blogspot.com >> >> >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> > -- Supun Kamburugamuva Member, Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org E-mail: [email protected]; Mobile: +1 812 369 6762 Blog: http://supunk.blogspot.com
