Yes, I think so.
From: Matthew Rawlings
[mailto:matthew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007
7:22 AM
To: Marc Gratacos
Subject: FW: FpML-IM-Custodian FW:
minutes meeting October 29 - message cancellations
Fyi – is there a
consensus?
Matthew
Rawlings
+44 791 539 7824
From: Dever, Michael J
[mailto:mjdever@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 31 October 2007 11:11
To: matthew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: FpML-IM-Custodian FW:
minutes meeting October 29 - message cancellations
Matthew
Yes. I thought you
were saying in order for the Inv Mgr to instruct a cancel they would need
permission from the custodian.
Mike
From: Matthew
Rawlings [mailto:matthew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007
5:48 AM
To: Dever, Michael J;
im-custodian@xxxxxxxx
Cc: 'Andrew
Jacobs'; 'MASSIN Francoise'
Subject: RE: FpML-IM-Custodian FW:
minutes meeting October 29 - message cancellations
Isn’t that what I
wrote?
Matthew
Rawlings
+44 791 539 7824
From: Dever, Michael J
[mailto:mjdever@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: 31 October 2007 00:06
To: im-custodian@xxxxxxxx
Cc: Andrew
Jacobs; MASSIN Francoise; Matthew Rawlings
Subject: RE: FpML-IM-Custodian FW:
minutes meeting October 29 - message cancellations
As a directed custodian we don't need
permission to allow the Inv Mgr to cancel a trade that they instructed us
on. This might be relevant between the buy side and the sell side, but as
a custodian we don't need permission
From:
im-custodian@xxxxxxxx [mailto:im-custodian@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Marc Gratacos
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007
2:54 PM
To: im-custodian@xxxxxxxx
Cc: Andrew
Jacobs; MASSIN Francoise; Matthew Rawlings
Subject: FpML-IM-Custodian FW:
minutes meeting October 29 - message cancellations
See below response from Matthew. This is
relevant to the discussion we had yesterday.
From: Matthew Rawlings
[mailto:matthew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007
2:36 PM
To: Marc Gratacos
Subject: RE: minutes meeting
October 29 - message cancellations
To advise a custodian you
would use Notification, because there is no permission sought.
To request the cancel of
an Order or a TradeAllegation, you need permission from the other side that
might have acted upon it.
Matthew
Rawlings
+44 791 539 7824
From: Marc Gratacos
[mailto:MGratacos@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: 30 October 2007 18:32
To: Matthew Rawlings
Subject: RE: minutes meeting October
29 - message cancellations
Matthew,
When would you use notification and when
request/response?
Thanks,
Marc
From: Matthew Rawlings
[mailto:matthew@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2007
2:03 PM
To: Marc Gratacos
Subject: RE: minutes meeting
October 29 - message cancellations
“JPM proposal was discussed. This seems to be the preferred approach in the
long-term but currently everything is a notification and there is no desire to
use a request/response scenario in the short term. It seems that the
request/response approach should be extended also for all the current
notification messages in the future.”
There was both notification and
request/response in the proposal.
Matthew Rawlings
+44 7915 397 824
From: Marc Gratacos
[mailto:MGratacos@xxxxxxxx]
Sent: 30 October 2007 18:01
To: im-custodian@xxxxxxxx;
Matthew Rawlings;
Andrew Jacobs; MASSIN Francoise
Subject: minutes meeting October
29 - message cancellations
Lucio Iida (BGI)
Mark Soussan (Western Asset)
Steven West (State Street)
Randy Magdaluyo (State Street)
Ivan Djurkin (BGI)
Steve Goswell (BGI)
Karel Engelen (ISDA)
Irina Yermakova (ISDA)
Francoise Massin
(SWIFT)
John Booth (Northern Trust)
Sudhakar Balagurusamy (State Street)
Kishore Saokar (State Street)
Robin Moyer (BBH)
Marc Gratacos (ISDA)
Message cancellations http://www.fpml.org/issues/view.php?id=330
- Participants agreed that there
is a need to introduce a specific message for cancellations.
- They expressed that the
preferred approach is to have a generic notification for cancelling a
message.
- JPM
proposal was discussed. This seems to be the preferred approach in the
long-term but currently everything is a notification and there is no
desire to use a request/response scenario in the short term. It seems that
the request/response approach should be extended also for all the current
notification messages in the future.
- Content of the message needs to
be discussed in the next meeting. If a notification message is generic, it
should not only be applicable to contracts.
- The new message will be
introduced in version 4.3. Version 4.2 is in Recommendation status and
cannot be reopened.
ACTIONS:
- Marc/Randy: to work on proposal
for message cancellations.
Let me know if I missed anything.
Kind Regards,
-Marc
+13472846531
**************************************************************************************************************************
The information contained in either this email and, if applicable, the
attachment, are confidential and are intended only for the recipient. The
contents of either the email or the attachment may not be disclosed or used by
anyone other than the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient(s), any
use, disclosure, copying, or distribution is prohibited and may be unlawful. If
you have received this communication in error, please notify us by e-mail at
isda@xxxxxxxx then delete the e-mail and all attachments and any copies
thereof. This communication is part of an ISDA process and is not intended for
unauthorized use or distribution.
**************************************************************************************************************************