[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] Comments on Editor Notes In Section 4.1 Service Description Model
Please, find my comments in the text Kind regards, Michael Poulin Senior Solution Architect, EMF Solution Management Fidelity Investments International ' +44-173-783-6038 * michael.poulin@uk.fid-intl.com @ http://www.fidelity.co.uk/ Important: Fidelity Investments International (Reg. No.1448245), Fidelity Investment Services Limited (Reg. No. 2016555), Fidelity Pensions Management (Reg. No. 2015142) and Financial Administration Services Limited (Reg. No. 1629709, a Fidelity Group company) are all registered in England and Wales, are authorised and regulated in the UK by the Financial Services Authority and have their registered offices at Oakhill House, 130 Tonbridge Road, Hildenborough, Tonbridge, Kent TN11 9DZ. Tel 01732 361144. Fidelity only gives information on products and does not give investment advice to private clients based on individual circumstances. Any comments or statements made are not necessarily those of Fidelity. The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. All e-mails sent from or to Fidelity may be subject to our monitoring procedures. Direct link to Fidelity's website - http://www.fidelity-international.com/world/index.html -----Original Message----- From: Danny Thornton [mailto:danny.thornton@scalablearchitectures.com] Sent: 12 March 2008 04:58 To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org Cc: klaskey@mitre.org Subject: [soa-rm-ra] Comments on Editor Notes In Section 4.1 Service Description Model I like the clarification between service description and service contract in the introduction of the Service Description Model. M.P. Based on my company experience, Service Contract is agreed composition of subsets of policies derived from the Service Description and policies provided/required/applied by the service consumer. Example: a service consumer wants to use existing SOA service for sensitive data. Service functionality meets consumer's needs very well but Service Description does not mention any security communication protocol. Consumer agrees with Provider that the latter would issue a version of the service capable communicate via, e.g., HTTPS based on the Security Policy represented by the service consumer. Thus, the Service Contract includes Policies from both participating parties. Section 4.1.1.1 Editor Note - Augmented Resource Model Comment: This looks like a Frank Action to incorporate the resource model modifications into section 3 and characterized versioning as we described a few meetings back. Section 4.1.1.2.4 Editor Note - Figure 22, Policy, Contract, Technical Assumptions, Semantics Model Comment: The elements of the model and their relationship are specific to service description (relationship of policies and contracts to technical assumptions for example) so this seems to be an appropriate place for the model and the text. Second Editor Note - Move figure 23 and some text to Section 4.4 Policies and Contracts Comment: Same comment as above, the discussion of performance metrics and SLAs is specific to Service Description. The reason it would not go into Policies and Contracts is because metrics are described in terms of measurable assertions and SLAs are a specialized form of contract. The Policies and Contract section is more generalized than what is being discussed in the Service Descriptoin section. This section also states that Metrics will be described in Section 4.4 Policies and Contracts. Section 4.4 describes metrics more generally as the measurability of Assertions and Commitments and their relatonships to the IT Mechanisms of Enforcement Point and Decision Point. M.P. I disagree with "performance metrics and SLAs is specific to Service Description". It is specific to the Service Contract only. A service provider may have a generic SLA but it can/should be 'overridden' by the Contract's SLA - it is specific for each individual service consumer execution context (business and technical) M.P. Sentence "The reason it would not go into Policies and Contracts is because metrics are described in terms of measurable assertions and SLAs are a specialized form of contract" says that specialized form of contract (SLA) is not a Contract. Oups! If the sentence would say "...it would go into ...", I were with it. M.P. I agree, Section 4.4 does not clearly define relationship between Description and Contract. The "measurability of Assertions and Commitments and their relationships" is important in this section but only after Description-Contract relations are clarified. In my first comment to this message, I tried to define these relations. Section 4.1.2.2 Editor Note - Figure 25 - The relationship between Message, Protocols, Action, and Endpoint Comment: A message can be an xml document with no associated protocols for delivery. The endpoint defines the protocol, for example soap or sockets or whatever you like. One way to characterize this would be to make the relationship between Message and Action dependent on Endpoint and then associate protocols with the Endpoint. M.P. This note is very much Web Services centric. We, probably, have to stay away from promoting particular technology. Danny --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]