OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

ebsoa message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: RE: [ebsoa] Does SOA Require Registry-Based Dynamic Discovery?


David,

I agree.  It should not be lost on anyone that my day job involves specific
registry technology.  My argument really is aimed at focusing the task of
defining SOA in abstract terms so that it can be applied in many places
where it would be beneficial.  The obvious long term goal when this model is
utilized are SOAs that function within multiple realizations.  Imagine if I
developed an SOA using the SOA RM, and now can expose my SOA over ebXML, WS,
and CORBA.  Awesome!

As a side note, why bother putting CPAs in a registry?  It's not like anyone
can join a negotiated collaboration, all you do in that case is slow the
runtime down a little bit.  CPP's, well, now there is a great thing to
register.  Putting CPAs in the registry for any reason other than archiving
is probably not sound architecturally.

-Matt

-----Original Message-----
From: David RR Webber [mailto:david@drrw.info] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 15, 2004 12:17 PM
To: Matthew MacKenzie
Cc: 'Chiusano Joseph'; 'ebSOA OASIS TC'
Subject: Re: [ebsoa] Does SOA Require Registry-Based Dynamic Discovery?

Matt,

Good technical answer - from the business stance - I would say an SOA 
has to have some shared
resource area where agreed too business process and control mechanisms, 
rules, state, etc
can be referenced and shared.   Otherwise we are back to out-of-band EDI 
style non-SOA
deployment environments.

Now - this could easily be a $3.00 per month common FTP area from an ISP 
- as you note
Matt - so long as its open to all participants.  The notion of 
"registry" does not have to imply
a full up ebXML registry deployment.

However - the formal agreements between participants, their roles, 
procedures and mechanisms
should be something that is dynamically configurable. Whether that is 
private or public - is then
the choice of the partners. 

Remember when we first designed ebXML - putting CPAs into registry was a 
no-no - since they
are private agreements.  Now we have a security model for registry and 
ability to control access -
it makes sense to have CPA definitions reachable by machine processes 
between partners (but not
between everyone in the collaboration!).

DW

Matthew MacKenzie wrote:

> My opinion is that a registry is nothing more than a very explicit 
> service discovery device.
>
>  
>
> An SOA does need a method of discovering services, and consuming them, 
> but this method may in some cases be subtle.  For example, my SOA may 
> operate on the premise that consumers all are aware of an enumeration 
> of service types, and their port numbers (think /etc/services in the 
> unix world), and allowable IP ranges for finding services.  Clients 
> may be configured something like:
>
>  
>
> {
>
>             Services imap, http, ssh, daytime, pop3, portmap
>
>             IPRange 192.168.0.0/24
>
> }
>
>  
>
> A client with such a configuration does have a way of discovering 
> services that are available to it, and of course, a way of binding to 
> them.
>
>  
>
> Contrast this with a registry driven SOA:
>
>  
>
> {
>
>             ServiceRegistry http://foo/registry
>
> }
>
>  
>
> The only difference is in the implementation detail and verbosity of 
> information available.  Conceptually, they are the same.
>
>  
>
>  
>
> --Matt MacKenzie
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *From:* Chiusano Joseph [mailto:chiusano_joseph@bah.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 15, 2004 11:38 AM
> *To:* ebSOA OASIS TC
> *Subject:* [ebsoa] Does SOA Require Registry-Based Dynamic Discovery?
>
>  
>
> What is the TC's opinion on the answer to the question of "does SOA 
> require registry-based dynamic discovery"? I know that Discovery is a 
> pattern in the .047 spec, which leads me to believe that the position 
> is that SOA does not *require* registry-based discovery.
>
>  
>
> For example, suppose that:
>
>  
>
> - 2 organizations are using Web Services in a "SOA-like" manner 
> (meaning shared services represented as Web Services, that are invoked 
> by other Web Services).
>
>  
>
> - There is no registry-based dynamic discovery, perhaps because the 
> organizations agree that these service locations are completely (or 
> relatively) stable, and that if the locations change, there will be 
> some out-of-band mechanism for propagating updated WSDL documents
>
>  
>
> Are these 2 organizations therefore *not* using a service-oriented 
> architecture? That is, does the second point completely negate the 
> first? Or, is it all really a matter of business and technical 
> requirements?
>
>  
>
> Kind Regards,
>
> Joseph Chiusano
>
> Booz Allen Hamilton
>
> Strategy and Technology Consultants to the World
>
>  
>





[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]