Skip to Content
author's profile photo Former Member
Former Member

Interface Determination causing issue in Receiver Determination

Hi

I am having an issue with interface and receiver determination as follows:

- Inbound message may be sent to two receivers.

- Message gets sent to first receiver, fails during interface determination. There are multiple inbound interfaces found based on a set of XPATH conditions. This creates an error 'Inbound interface found more than once for outbound interface '. That is itself is <b>not </b>the issue.

- Issue is that the message is stopped from going to the other receiver even if there are no issues in the interface determination for that receiver.

Is there a way to resolve this? Appreciate any help. Thx, Duncan

Add a comment
10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

Assigned Tags

Related questions

7 Answers

  • Best Answer
    author's profile photo Former Member
    Former Member
    Posted on Feb 26, 2007 at 07:04 PM

    Thanks for the quick replies. Scenario is configured as follows:

    <b>Rec Determination</b>

    XPATH condition used to route only certain messages to Receiver A.

    All messages routed also to Receiver B.

    <b>Interface Determination</b> exists for both Receiver A and Receiver B. For Receiver B, Interface Determination contains further XPATH conditions to determine which Inbound Interface and Mapping to use.

    I see my messages getting to Receiver A but failing to get to Receiver B. Any idea? Thx, Duncan

    Add a comment
    10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

    • Former Member Former Member

      Hi Duncan -

      In your Interface Determination (ID) for this one receiver, you do seem to have the same inbound interface (WMMBXY.WMMBID01) configured more than once. That in and of itself is not the problem. The problem does arise when the conditions you have set up for each instance of this inbound interface evaluate to true and thus, the "Inbound interface found more than once for outbound interface" error.

      In your ID trace, you can see the following:

      <Trace level="2" type="T">Check conditions for (Inb: Party Srvc If) <b>GLR430 WMMBXY.WMMBID01</b></Trace>

      <Trace level="3" type="T">...call rule engine for Condition%CL_SAI_SWF_RULE_ENGINE.MSG_GET(MSG=&_MSG&;NSP=&_NSM&;XPATH=<b>"/p2:receivingAdvice/receivingAdviceItemContainmentLineItem/purchaseOrder/documentReference/uniqueCreatorIdentification")% EX</b></Trace>

      <Trace level="2" type="T">......extracting (new) for Extractor: XP /p2:receivingAdvice/receivingAdviceItemContainmentLineItem/purchaseOrder/documentReference/uniqueCreatorIdentification</Trace>

      <Trace level="2" type="T">......extracting values found: 2</Trace>

      <Trace level="2" type="T"><b>...valid InbIf with Condition: WMMBXY.WMMBID01</b></Trace>

      <Trace level="2" type="T">Check conditions for (Inb: Party Srvc If) <b>GLR430 WMMBXY.WMMBID01</b></Trace>

      <Trace level="3" type="T">...call rule engine for Condition%CL_SAI_SWF_RULE_ENGINE.MSG_GET(MSG=&_MSG&;NSP=&_NSM&;XPATH=<b>"/p2:receivingAdvice/carrier/additionalPartyIdentification/additionalPartyIdentificationValue")% CE SHUTTLE</b></Trace>

      <Trace level="2" type="T">......extracting (new) for Extractor: XP /p2:receivingAdvice/carrier/additionalPartyIdentification/additionalPartyIdentificationValue</Trace>

      <Trace level="2" type="T">......extracting values found: 1</Trace>

      <Trace level="2" type="T"><b>...valid InbIf with Condition: WMMBXY.WMMBID01</b></Trace>

      </Trace>

      </Trace>

      For the same service/interface (GLR430 WMMBXY.WMMBID01), the condition it evaluates to true more than once - thus the error. In such a case, you have to make sure the condition accounts for mutually exclusive cases. Or perhaps you can configure the inbound interface once and set OR conditions for the different cases.

      Regards,

      Jin

  • author's profile photo Former Member
    Former Member
    Posted on Feb 26, 2007 at 06:52 PM

    Hi Duncan,

    Hv u specified differnet conditions for the two inbound interfaces? Also r u usins simple or enhanced receiver determination. I guess u r usin=g simple receiver dtermination. Also, r thr two receiver agreements for the the two receivers.

    Regards,

    Akshay

    Add a comment
    10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

  • Posted on Feb 26, 2007 at 06:53 PM

    For each business system which is there as a receiver you need to provide individual interface determination

    Add a comment
    10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

  • Posted on Feb 26, 2007 at 06:54 PM

    also chcek:

    <a href="/people/venkataramanan.parameswaran/blog/2006/03/17/illustration-of-enhanced-receiver-determination--sp16 of Enhanced Receiver Determination - SP16</a>

    Add a comment
    10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

  • author's profile photo Former Member
    Former Member
    Posted on Feb 26, 2007 at 07:45 PM

    What I see is strange. When I push in the message, I see only that Interface Determination failed. So I do not even see the normal split that I would expect.

    Add a comment
    10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

  • author's profile photo Former Member
    Former Member
    Posted on Feb 26, 2007 at 10:21 PM

    Hi Jin, Thanks for the reply. I understand the reason that the ID is failing. However, it seems odd that because ID for one receiver is failing, it does not even try and process for the other receiver. Does that sound right? Thx, Duncan

    Add a comment
    10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

    • Former Member

      Hi Duncan -

      I understand where you're coming from. Unfortunately, in the XI pipeline processing, the Receiver Grouping and Message Branch/Split steps only takes place after the Interface Determination step for a given Service/Outbound Interface/Namespace. So the exception in the Interface Determination prevents the branch/split from occurring and proceeding independently. Currently, I have not insight whether such behavior will be changed in the future.

      Regards,

      Jin

  • author's profile photo Former Member
    Former Member
    Posted on Feb 26, 2007 at 11:43 PM

    Hi Jin, Thanks for the answer. Hopefully, this gets 'improved' in a future release =) Thx, Duncan

    Add a comment
    10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

Before answering

You should only submit an answer when you are proposing a solution to the poster's problem. If you want the poster to clarify the question or provide more information, please leave a comment instead, requesting additional details. When answering, please include specifics, such as step-by-step instructions, context for the solution, and links to useful resources. Also, please make sure that you answer complies with our Rules of Engagement.
You must be Logged in to submit an answer.

Up to 10 attachments (including images) can be used with a maximum of 1.0 MB each and 10.5 MB total.