|
[EDI-L Mailing List Archive Home]
[Message List]
[Reply To This Message]
Re: <SALES>: webMethods vs. GIS
This is most likely done with the EDIFACT AUTACK (ISO 9735-6 Secure
authentication and acknowledgement) message. So why would this be "BS"?
Authentication seems most useful for high-value transactions on behalf
of third parties (e.g., bank payment orders), so I would
only question why one would go out of her way to authenticate an
invoice? Don't you already know your suppliers and have a vague idea
what you owe them?
William J. Kammerer
Novannet
Columbus, OH 43221-3859 . USA
+1 (614) 487-0320
----- Original Message -----
From: "Thomas Seay" <
To: "Jeff Garwick" < "'James Hatcher'"
< "Hurd, Richard [SLCUS]" <
Cc: <
Sent: Monday, 15 August, 2005 02:35 PM
Subject: RE: <SALES>: [EDI-L] webMethods vs. GIS
In regards to a recent posting, you
> mentioned that Seeburger's
> product can add a digital signature on an EDI INVOIC
> interchange for
> European partners?
This I have GOT to hear! But wait a minute, because I
am rolling up my trousers so that the BS does not get
on them.
Thomas
|
|
Subscribe in XML format
| RSS 2.0 |
|
| Atom 0.3 |
|
|
Cart
