[This message was posted by Ryan Pierce (FPL Technical Director) of FIX Protocol Ltd. <[email protected]> to the "General Q/A" discussion forum at http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/22. You can reply to it on-line at http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/read/f1f6be67 - PLEASE DO NOT REPLY BY MAIL.]
> There is a need for a standard way to convey counterparty restrictions > to a third party over FIX and the PartyID block seems like the solution. Thanks for your input. I envision the Parties Reference Data message suite as being the building blocks upon which one can construct a lot of things, including a very robust entitlement system. This is the ideal case, though; we don't have time to model a full entitlement system for inclusion in FIX 5.0 SP2. I hope that building such an entitlement framework can be taken up by one or more Committees or Working Groups in the near future. In the mean time, the two example PartyRole values you mention do allow for some rudimentary access control. While I don't think continuing to expand PartyRole is the best long-term solution, I do recognize your immediate business need to define acceptable and unacceptable settling parties, and I do support your proposed enhancement. [You can unsubscribe from this discussion group by sending a message to mailto:[email protected]] --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Financial Information eXchange" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/FIX-Protocol?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
