|
|
|
|
Re: Setting "NetworkAccessPointID" on the ActiveParticipant in ATNA messages (update from [message #40080 is a reply to message #39987] |
Wed, 09 January 2008 17:42 |
Matthew Davis Messages: 269 Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi all,
Here is an update from Bill this morning on the mailing list about this:
"2) Each ActiveParticipant needs an IP address as identification
So then, when specifing a destination ActiveParticipant, there are two
choices: UserID which holds the destination endpoint (and therefore the
IP address embedded inside it) OR the NetworkAccessPointID (which as you
point out is labeled MC and not M). I will update the wiki page to make
either acceptable and to fix the inconsistencies you mention.
Concerning IP vs DNS addresses, I will build the tool so that either is
acceptable. Thanks for bringing this up. There has been some discussion
that IP address are more appropriate. We will deal with that in the
post connectathon discussion."
We've already made an update that includes the NetworkAccessPointID in
the ATNA messages, so I'll just leave it as is. We statically set
NetworkAccessPointTypeCode to 2 (IP Address) and use resolved-to-IP
addresses for the NetworkAccessPointID. I believe there will be some
disagreement at Connectathon on using IP vs. DNS (system) name (we've
seen this before... the Audit Repositories will want a system name so
they know where it came from without having to reverse lookup the IP).
But, we'll deal with that on the ground if people want something else.
Please let me know if you have any questions about this.
Thanks,
-Matt
Matthew Davis wrote:
> Sorry, forgot to post yesterday... new build is available that enables
> this.
>
> It uses your local IP address for the Source NetworkAccessPointID and
> the remote server's IP address (resolves from hostname if necessary) for
> the Destination NetworkAccessPointID.
>
> I'm still a little unsure about the actual requirement of this because
> CP-164 contradicts (or builds on?) DICOM 95, but whatever. Not exactly
> in the mood to argue at this point, especially for those of you trying
> to finish up!
>
> Thanks,
> -Matt
>
> Sumedh wrote:
>> Hey Matt, any updates on this? This is a blocker for us passing the
>> syslog tests.
>>
>> Do let me know, thanks for taking this up so quickly.
>>
>> regards,
>> Sumedh
>>
(
|
|
|
|
Re: Setting "NetworkAccessPointID" on the ActiveParticipant in ATNA messages [message #584249 is a reply to message #39894] |
Mon, 07 January 2008 16:40 |
Matthew Davis Messages: 269 Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
OK, yep.... looks like this is required. I will try to find a strategy
to handle this without changing the ATNA API and get an update out
before the end of the day.
Thanks,
-Matt
Sumedh wrote:
> Hey Matt,
>
> I have another query. Looks like setting "NetworkAccessPointID" on the
> ActiveParticipant is mandatory for ITI-18 and ITI-43 syslog messages to
> be termed legitimate by the folks at IHE. This is what they're looking for:
>
> <ActiveParticipant NetworkAccessPointTypeCodeError="" UserID="XdsTester"
> UserIsRequestor="true" NetworkAccessPointID="192.168.254.16">
> <RoleIDCode code="110153" codeSystemName="DCM" displayName="Source"/>
> </ActiveParticipant>
>
> Anyway I can set that parameter using the API currently?
>
> Thanks.
>
> regards,
> Sumedh
>
|
|
|
|
Re: Setting "NetworkAccessPointID" on the ActiveParticipant in ATNA messages [message #584274 is a reply to message #39957] |
Tue, 08 January 2008 16:36 |
Matthew Davis Messages: 269 Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Sorry, forgot to post yesterday... new build is available that enables this.
It uses your local IP address for the Source NetworkAccessPointID and
the remote server's IP address (resolves from hostname if necessary) for
the Destination NetworkAccessPointID.
I'm still a little unsure about the actual requirement of this because
CP-164 contradicts (or builds on?) DICOM 95, but whatever. Not exactly
in the mood to argue at this point, especially for those of you trying
to finish up!
Thanks,
-Matt
Sumedh wrote:
> Hey Matt, any updates on this? This is a blocker for us passing the
> syslog tests.
>
> Do let me know, thanks for taking this up so quickly.
>
> regards,
> Sumedh
>
|
|
|
Re: Setting "NetworkAccessPointID" on the ActiveParticipant in ATNA messages (update from [message #584306 is a reply to message #39987] |
Wed, 09 January 2008 17:42 |
Matthew Davis Messages: 269 Registered: July 2009 |
Senior Member |
|
|
Hi all,
Here is an update from Bill this morning on the mailing list about this:
"2) Each ActiveParticipant needs an IP address as identification
So then, when specifing a destination ActiveParticipant, there are two
choices: UserID which holds the destination endpoint (and therefore the
IP address embedded inside it) OR the NetworkAccessPointID (which as you
point out is labeled MC and not M). I will update the wiki page to make
either acceptable and to fix the inconsistencies you mention.
Concerning IP vs DNS addresses, I will build the tool so that either is
acceptable. Thanks for bringing this up. There has been some discussion
that IP address are more appropriate. We will deal with that in the
post connectathon discussion."
We've already made an update that includes the NetworkAccessPointID in
the ATNA messages, so I'll just leave it as is. We statically set
NetworkAccessPointTypeCode to 2 (IP Address) and use resolved-to-IP
addresses for the NetworkAccessPointID. I believe there will be some
disagreement at Connectathon on using IP vs. DNS (system) name (we've
seen this before... the Audit Repositories will want a system name so
they know where it came from without having to reverse lookup the IP).
But, we'll deal with that on the ground if people want something else.
Please let me know if you have any questions about this.
Thanks,
-Matt
Matthew Davis wrote:
> Sorry, forgot to post yesterday... new build is available that enables
> this.
>
> It uses your local IP address for the Source NetworkAccessPointID and
> the remote server's IP address (resolves from hostname if necessary) for
> the Destination NetworkAccessPointID.
>
> I'm still a little unsure about the actual requirement of this because
> CP-164 contradicts (or builds on?) DICOM 95, but whatever. Not exactly
> in the mood to argue at this point, especially for those of you trying
> to finish up!
>
> Thanks,
> -Matt
>
> Sumedh wrote:
>> Hey Matt, any updates on this? This is a blocker for us passing the
>> syslog tests.
>>
>> Do let me know, thanks for taking this up so quickly.
>>
>> regards,
>> Sumedh
>>
(
|
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.04076 seconds