Integration
This is an IBM Automation portal for Integration products. To view all of your ideas submitted to IBM, create and manage groups of Ideas, or create an idea explicitly set to be either visible by all (public) or visible only to you and IBM (private), use the IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com).
Shape the future of IBM!
We invite you to shape the future of IBM, including product roadmaps, by submitting ideas that matter to you the most. Here's how it works:
Search existing ideas
Start by searching and reviewing ideas and requests to enhance a product or service. Take a look at ideas others have posted, and add a comment, vote, or subscribe to updates on them if they matter to you. If you can't find what you are looking for,
Post your ideas
Post an idea.
Get feedback from the IBM team and other customers to refine your idea.
Follow the idea through the IBM Ideas process.
Specific links you will want to bookmark for future use
Welcome to the IBM Ideas Portal (https://www.ibm.com/ideas) - Use this site to find out additional information and details about the IBM Ideas process and statuses.
IBM Unified Ideas Portal (https://ideas.ibm.com) - Use this site to view all of your ideas, create new ideas for any IBM product, or search for ideas across all of IBM.
ideasibm@us.ibm.com - Use this email to suggest enhancements to the Ideas process or request help from IBM for submitting your Ideas.
Dear Team,
Is there any work around for this problem. Kindly comment.
Dear Team,
Kindly share your feedback/update so that we can update client accordingly.
As per your suggestion we have tried handling by passing LocalEnvironment. But we could not mention decimal values as it LocalEnvironment accepts only integers. With Integer our purpose will not solve as we cannot go less than 1 sec. If we give timeout as 0 sec in TCPIPClientReceive node then it is waiting till timeout value of partner application. Kindly let us know how to pass value less than 1 sec using LocalEnvironment.
Idea / RFE Review. Thank you for taking the time to raise this suggestion. We see the value in being able to reduce timeout values to under a second, but when dealing with very small single digit millisecond values we would be concerned that honouring such small values would most likely need to be documented as supported on a best-efforts basis. The idea as expressed (and the case which was raised) refer to the TCPIPClient Output node, and yet also suggest a need for a "wait time" ... so it would be good to have clarification of how you expect the wider use case to work ... Typically users might use a message flow with a TCPIPClientOutput node (which does not have a timeout terminal) which sends data to a partner application but then wire the node in the flow to a TCPIPClientReceive node (which does have a timeout terminal) which would be responsible for receiving the response back from the partner application. Is this the design pattern being considered? If so, is the setting required for the TCPIPClientReceive node? Would it be sufficient to control the property via LocalEnvironment rather than via the properties of the node (this could provide us more flexibility for back compatability as it would avoid confusing users over the units of the property on the node)? Is the expectation that at some point after the timeout is reached, flow control would then pass down the Timeout terminal of the TCPIPClientReceive ?
Status of the idea is updated to FutureConsideration (please note that this is a statement of intent but does not imply a guaranteed timeline for implementation).