Announcement

Collapse

Mirth Connect 4.0.1 Released!

Mirth Connect 4.0.1 is now available as an appliance update and on our GitHub page. Mirth Connect 4.0.1 is a patch release containing a bug fix which includes fixing a Jetty keystore regression that caused Connect servers using a PKCS12 keystore containing a wildcard certificate and/or a certificate with a SAN to throw an exception on startup. See the release notes for the list of fixes and updates.

Download | See What's New | Upgrade Guide | Release Notes

For discussion on this release, see this thread.
See more
See less

Question about ack-variable

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Question about ack-variable

    Hello all,

    when I set "Send ACK" to "Yes" on the LLP-Listener-Connector Mirth generates a default ACK-message.
    I want to ask if there is a way to modify this default ACK-Message before it reaches Mirth's communication partner(for example in the postprocessor script). For the incoming messages exists the "message"-variable in order to do this. Is there such variable for the ACK-messages?

    Thanks a lot for any hint!

    Greets,

    Svetlomir

    Post edited by: Svetlomir Kasabov, at: 08/01/2008 09:19

  • #2
    I realized I'm responding to a ~4 year old post, but did you ever find an answer to this? I have the same need - I'd just like to let Mirth build the ACK with their default logic and then tweak it a bit before it goes out.
    Thanks
    -Patrick

    Comment


    • #3
      Under send ACK.

      There are setting for Successful, Error and Reject. Next to that is Error Code then the message.

      Comment


      • #4
        Thanks - what I need to do however is copy over MSA-2 (original message control ID) to MSH-10 (ACK message control ID). The sending system (Meditech) is telling me that they require the ACK to have the same control ID as the message they sent out.

        I know how to build a completely custom ACK from scratch but would prefer to just tweak the standard Mirth ACK so that I don't have to try to replicate the accept/reject/error logic.

        Comment

        Working...
        X