[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ebsoa] Process-Oriented Architectures (POA)
Mark: I would say no since the ebXML messaging team, CPP/A team and existing architecture all reflect the ability to constrain/run processes as per the ebXML requirements. It is not added since this paragraph exists at line 981 in the existing ebXML TA version 1.04: "The ebXML Messaging Service Layer enforces the "rules of engagement" as defined by two Trading Partners in a Collaboration Protocol Agreement (including, but not limited to security and Business Process functions related to Message delivery). The Collaboration Protocol Agreement defines the acceptable behavior by which each Trading Partner agrees to abide. The definition of these ground rules can take many forms including formal Collaboration Protocol Agreements, interactive agreements established at the time a business transaction occurs (e.g. buying a book online), or other forms of agreement. There are Messaging Service Layer functions that enforce these ground rules. Any violation of the ground rules result in an error condition, which is reported using the appropriate means." To me, this is the most desirable architecture. ebXML kicks out unwanted electronic signals at the front gate. This could help alleviate DoS type attacks since a system could implement a feature to stop parsing incoming messages as soon as the CPA ID is detected as invalid (Stream style parses can be interrupted based on events). Also - there is no consensus yet on a requirement for the architecture to be KISS as of now. We need to discuss the scope in New Orleans to decide this. I am against adding unnecessary complexity however if our primary audience is system implementors, then a level of detail sufficient to aid them will be required. Let's discuss Face to face in NO. Duane Mark Yader wrote: >I question this: "The ability to support processes requires additional >functionality in the transport layer where the rules of the process should >be enforced." > >Does this "additional functionality" (business processs support) lead us >away from the KISS principle for the architecture. Again, I'm getting >confused as to how much fits under the umbrella of ebSOA. Can we design an >architecture in which the enforcement for business process rules is not part >of the SOA ? Is this really a "transport layer" function ? > >Mark > > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com> >To: "Duane Nickull" <dnickull@adobe.com> >Cc: "David RR Webber" <david@drrw.info>; "ebSOA" ><ebsoa@lists.oasis-open.org>; "Monica J. Martin" <monica.martin@sun.com> >Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2004 12:00 PM >Subject: Re: [ebsoa] Process-Oriented Architectures (POA) > > > > >>Duane Nickull wrote: >> >> >>>The way I understood it is that the term "Process Oriented Architecture" >>>refers to the business or other end users point of view whereas SOA >>>really a FSV term. This aligns with the UMM and other higher level MDA >>>approaches. >>> >>>The ebXML TA and UN/CEFACT eBusiness Architecture both support >>>processes. The ability to support processes requires additional >>>functionality in the transport layer where the rules of the process >>>should be enforced. >>> >>>Another term that has recently gathered momentum is "event driven >>>architecture". >>> >>> >>Yes - Gartner has been heavy on this one. >> >> >> >>>All SOA's are event driven by nature. >>> >>> >>Agree. Eric Newcomer made the same comment at a recent session here in >>DC. >> >>Joe >> >> >> >>>We may still have to explain this. >>> >>>Duane Nickull >>> >>>Chiusano Joseph wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>>>David RR Webber wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>Joe, >>>>> >>>>>I humbly submit this is a redherring. >>>>> >>>>>Service Oriented IMHO already implies Process by extension - since >>>>>behind the delivery of any service there must be a process >>>>>controlling and facilitating it. Tha'ts why BPSS and BPEL are part >>>>>of the SOA stack. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>Thanks David - but according to whom are they part of the SOA stack? >>>> >>>>Joe >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>We need another acronym like a hole in the head - let's leave that >>>>>stuff to the professionals at Gartner to dream up, eh? ; -) >>>>> >>>>>Cheers, DW. >>>>> >>>>>----- Original Message ----- >>>>>From: "Chiusano Joseph" <chiusano_joseph@bah.com> >>>>>To: "ebSOA" <ebsoa@lists.oasis-open.org> >>>>>Cc: "Monica J. Martin" <monica.martin@sun.com> >>>>>Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2004 9:30 AM >>>>>Subject: [ebsoa] Process-Oriented Architectures (POA) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>I know that our concentration is to be service-oriented >>>>>> >>>>>> >architectures, > > >>>>>>but at the same time I'm thinking about what will lie beyond (so that >>>>>> >>>>>> >we > > >>>>>>can best prepare). A term popped into my head on the way home >>>>>> >>>>>> >yesterday > > >>>>>>(the DC Beltway apparatentely inspires me): Process-Oriented >>>>>>Architecture, or "POA". >>>>>> >>>>>>Has anyone heard this term used before? I Google'd it and found few >>>>>>hits, all of which seemed to be individual (rather than corporate) >>>>>>references. >>>>>> >>>>>>As you can tell from the term, just as SOAs enable (involve, pick >>>>>> >>>>>> >your > > >>>>>>favorite word here) the use of shared services, POAs will extend SOAs >>>>>> >>>>>> >to > > >>>>>>enable the use of shared Web Services-based processes that are based >>>>>> >>>>>> >on > > >>>>>>shared Web Services that are defined within SOAs, working in concert >>>>>>with each other. So for a US federal application (my primary client), >>>>>>this could mean a set of shared Web Services-based business processes >>>>>>for federal agencies, in a flexible, agile, process environment. >>>>>> >>>>>>Does this concept resound with anyone? >>>>>>-- >>>>>>Kind Regards, >>>>>>Joseph Chiusano >>>>>>Associate >>>>>>Booz | Allen | Hamilton >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>-- >>>Senior Standards Strategist >>>Adobe Systems, Inc. >>>http://www.adobe.com >>> >>> >>-- >>Kind Regards, >>Joseph Chiusano >>Associate >>Booz | Allen | Hamilton >> >> >> > > > > -- Senior Standards Strategist Adobe Systems, Inc. http://www.adobe.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]