Order Import Fails For EDI 850 POI With Cannot Get Valid Id For Ship_to_org_id (Doc ID 756647.1)

Last updated on JULY 13, 2016

Applies to:

Oracle EDI Gateway - Version to [Release 11.5.10]
Information in this document applies to any platform.
***Checked for relevance on 13-JAN-2015***


The e-Commerce gateway import program for e-Commerce Gateway (EDI) 850 Purchase Order Inbound (POI) places data into the order interface tables, but the order is in error with the message:

6/6CN265 0000370// Cannot get valid ID for - ship_to_org_id

The problem seems to be that the address associated with the EDI location code does not match that
set in the import flat file. ECE_POI_ADDRESS_PRECEDENCE=LOC for inbound 850. The only difference
is that the address in oracle has address line 4, the import flat file does not. The following
flat file data causes the failure:

1500 20 35 161 Ship_To_EDI_Location_Code CNH79862C
1500 30 60 196 Ship_To_Address_Name
1500 40 35 256 Ship_To_Address1 ROTHER BROS. INC.
1500 50 35 291 Ship_To_Address2 HWY 183 NORTH
1500 60 35 326 Ship_To_Address3 P. O. BOX 547
1500 70 35 361 Ship_To_Address4
1500 80 30 396 Ship_To_City CLINTON
1500 90 15 426 Ship_To_Postal_Code 73601
1500 100 20 441 Ship_To_Country_INT US
1500 110 3 461 Ship_To_Country_Ext1 US
1500 120 20 464 Ship_To_State_INT OK
1500 130 10 484 Ship_To_State_Ext1 OK

If I populate Ship_To_Address4 then the order passes through order import without error.

It seems to me that the import program should not pass this order with a mismatched ship_to
address into the order interface tables. The correct behaviour should be to place the order in the
staged documents folder of e-commerce gateway responsibility.

We are using both ship_to location components, location code and address, in order to catch
changes in the ship to address at our trading partner. We have set up the address in OM for the
location code, but we also want to detect if the address for that location code changes. The
location code corresponds to a dealer code at our trading partner, and the actual dealer ship_to
address can change, order to order. Because we submit both location code and address we are
relying on the following behaviour, as descibed in the ECG user guide to detect a mismatch between
our address in OM and that currently defined for our trading partner's dealer:

LOC (Default)- Address components and/or location code combination
The address is derived from the combination of location code and address
components. If there is only one value provided, either location code or address
components, the address will be derived based on the provided value. If both
location code and address components are provided, then it will be based on the
combination of both.
Note: If no address is found for both location code and address
components or if the populated address components and location
code do not match, then a message ’Unable to derive ship to address’
will appear.
If both location code and physical address are provided, then it will derive address
through location code and compare it with that derived through physical address.

So, if the dealer ship_to address changes, normally the order will fail to process through ECG,
being held up in the Staged documents area with a 'unable to derive address' error. When this
occurs, we update the ship_to address in OM for the location code to match that in ECG and
resubmit the order. In the case I describe, this does not occur, as it seems that address line 4
is not included in the requirement for a matching address. This seems inconsistent to me.


Sign In with your My Oracle Support account

Don't have a My Oracle Support account? Click to get started

My Oracle Support provides customers with access to over a
Million Knowledge Articles and hundreds of Community platforms