Open position not displayed for CL and COIL

[oclop]

Dierk and others,

I have also complained to IB by opening a ticket but no answer for the time being. On my side, In this ticket I requested IB to extend availability of TWS 887 until they upgrade their API if they are not able to do it in time for the 23rd.

The problem is that there is a problem here and that if things carry on this way, I do not see a solution happening before the 23rd October.

I was wondering if a "quick and dirty" fix was not possible on the NT side until this problem is resolved? It does not seem too difficult to shift the expiry date by 1 month when this is receive over the API.

I know that for you as a software provider is not a nice solution. However, you have some customers that rely on your tool to trade the market and it would help us a lot if you could provide us a patch that resolves the issue until the TWS is fixed.

Regards,

[NinjaTrader_Ray]

Hi All,

Here is an idea -

- We could hack something in as a workaround however, this comes at the expense of risk to internal logic that is good and stable
- The hack likely could be an user defined ammendment to the IB symbol map for a particular instrument where you would add an offset such as (-1) which means take the expiration month given by IB + the offset in months to arrive at the correct expiration
- I am adverse to doing this in NT 6.5
- I am open to making this change to NT7 which of course means it is BETA and you would have it before the 23rd

Please let me know your thoughts.

[noincomenojobnoassets]

Sounds good, Ray!

Having it before the 23rd in the NT7 beta sounds even better!

Thanks a lot, also to Dierk for looking after this problem.

[oclop]

Hello,

it sounds good to me as well.

However, I will need to have access to NT7 as soon as possible so I can start moving accross the strategies, the databases, start doing some testing and get some confidence on the platform before I start trading live on the 23.

Regards

[laparker]

ok Ray, sounds like a plan. I would echo the request to get access to it asap to give time to set it up and test it out before the 23rd

thanks for your help.

[th-trader]

ray, Yes, good idea!

Another echo, can we get access to NT7 beta asap.

[laparker]

I just got this reply back from IB:

" I discussed this issue to the development team and notified Ninja Trader. In the next release of the API program, we are going to include the related field in order to determine the contract month completely.

Raymund IB API Support"

This is the most positive response I've had from IB so far. It, of course, gives no time ETA indication so the NT7 fix still looks like something that might provide an interim solution.

[NinjaTrader_Ray]

I just got this reply back from IB:

" I discussed this issue to the development team and notified Ninja Trader. In the next release of the API program, we are going to include the related field in order to determine the contract month completely.

Raymund IB API Support"

This is the most positive response I've had from IB so far. It, of course, gives no time ETA indication so the NT7 fix still looks like something that might provide an interim solution.

That's great however as you pointed out, we are at the mercy of when this will be delivered.

Some clarification points -

- NT7 Beta is Beta and for the record, I would be ultra cautious in live trading, especially involving automated strategies
- I am less cautious about throwing some live trades manually via an order entry window
- Internal strategy code as well as chart bar construction logic has went through a lot of changes and needs to be thoroughly tested in backtest and then in real-time SIM101 prior to live trading
- There will be lots of bugs

That being said, I realize this is not an optimal solution but its one we can work with. The 1st wave of public beta will be release sometime next week, likely late in the week. To be a part of this, please send the following to our support email address:

Subject: Beta List Request Atten: Daniella

Include the following info:

- Full Name
- License key #
- Country
- Include in the email body "IB Energies Issues"

[th-trader]

Thanks Ray, NT 7 Beta request submitted. I fully understand that NT 7 is a beta product.

[oscarblank]

Getting IB to release the API fix is obviously the preferred and ideal option. However, based on how they will not offer an ETA on the release of this fix, no matter how much we ask, we are then forced to find other workarounds.

The NT7 BETA option is better than no option at all. However, it would seem to me that the simplest option (involving the least amount of work for every party involved) would be to simply continue support for TWS 887 until AFTER the API fix is released.

I got the same reply from Raymund at IB today, as well as a similar reply 2 days ago. Both times I had asked him specifically, "why not just continue to support TWS 887 until IB can release the API fix?" And both replies from him said basically the same thing: "We know about the issue. The fix will be in the next API release. But we can't give an ETA." He made no mention of whether or not they would continue to support TWS 887 past Oct. 23.

I'm going to keep asking him ("why not continue to support TWS 887 until after the API fix"), and maybe if everyone else here that's been in contact with him does the same, we can get an answer to that question as well. In my humble opinion, this just seems like a no-brainer.

(Thanks to noincome and laparker for helping me out with my TWS 887 question earlier.)

[NinjaTrader_Ray]

Getting IB to release the API fix is obviously the preferred and ideal option. However, based on how they will not offer an ETA on the release of this fix, no matter how much we ask, we are then forced to find other workarounds.

The NT7 BETA option is better than no option at all. However, it would seem to me that the simplest option (involving the least amount of work for every party involved) would be to simply continue support for TWS 887 until AFTER the API fix is released.

I got the same reply from Raymund at IB today, as well as a similar reply 2 days ago. Both times I had asked him specifically, "why not just continue to support TWS 887 until IB can release the API fix?" And both replies from him said basically the same thing: "We know about the issue. The fix will be in the next API release. But we can't give an ETA." He made no mention of whether or not they would continue to support TWS 887 past Oct. 23.

I'm going to keep asking him ("why not continue to support TWS 887 until after the API fix"), and maybe if everyone else here that's been in contact with him does the same, we can get an answer to that question as well. In my humble opinion, this just seems like a no-brainer.

(Thanks to noincome and laparker for helping me out with my TWS 887 question earlier.)

I am not sure what implications IB may have if they kept support for 887 but I agree that it would be a great solution for you and NinjaTrader.

[noincomenojobnoassets]

Hi everyone,

According to IB, they are implementing some new security features that requires users to upgrade. This may happen "once every couple of years".

I'm going to send in another ticket and also request continuing 887 support.

[oclop]

Hello,

this is the answer I got from IB: "Unfortunately IB will not be able to adjust the time when Build 887 is de-supported. IB is aware of the issue with the expiry date and is working on a fix. The fix should be available shortly."

I have reopened the ticket to request a precise date for the fix. I'll keep you posted on the answer.

Regards

[oclop]

Hello,

I have just received the following communication from IB: "I just received an update that the next release for the API should be available approximately within the next 2 weeks." This comes from Angel in IBCS.

Dierk, and others, could you please confirm this with your contacts in IBCS?

Thanks

[oclop]

Hello,

did you receive the following communication from IB:

"Please be aware of an IB-specific labeling issue with respect to the NYMEX/GLOBEX mini oil and gas futures and options products. It is industry standard to refer to the expiration month of such commodities as the month FOLLOWING the actual Last Trade Date for that product. For example, a mini Natural Gas issue whose expiration date is Aug. 27, would be commonly referred to in the industry as the September Natural Gas issue. In order to conform to the industry standard label, IB references the expiration date of the contract as the first business date of the following month. Such a reference results in the IB-labeling of the affected contracts with a Last Trade Date of Aug. 27 as a September contract (thus reflecting the industry-norm). The end result is that the contract now has the correct label, but an incorrect Last Trade Date.
At expiration, in order to properly manage the expiration process, IB restates the expiration date to reflect the actual Last Trade Date (Aug. 27 in the above example). The end result, on expiration day, the contract will have the correct date information (Aug. 27), but a non-standard label. Using the above example, the contract would, for that day, be labeled as an August issue as opposed to a September issue."

Does this mean that they are reporting now correctly the contract month on the API?

Regards