Re: [wsrm] WS-Reliability and ebMS

["iwasa" <kiwasa@jp.fujitsu.com>]

Comments are in-line:


> Hi,
>
> > I think just comparing ebXML MS and SOAP with WS-R
> > might not be appropriate to make a decision which you should choose.
>
>          I get what you mean. It may be like comparing an apple to an
> orange. But why I quote WS-Reliability and  ebMS together is due to the
> following ideas.
>
> > I think the ebXML is comprehensive framework
> > for B2B, and it is including necessary functions
> > for B2B like Reliable Messaging and Security.
> > And it is going to be used in various industries
> > and various governments for their B2B infrastructure.
>
>          Totally agree. It is also the design rationale behind ebXML. The
> key point is business *across* business, which seems to consider a broader
> system scope instead of talking about a traditional back-end system behind
a
> web service.
>
> > On the other hand, WS-Reliability will be used
> > for Web Services in general. Since the current
> > SOAP doesn't provide reliability. WS-Reliability
> > is created from Reliable Messaging in ebXML MS,
> > to make it usable with SOAP, without requiring
> > other portion of ebXML.
>
>          IBM also defines a specification on WS-ReliableMessaging, as
quoted
> in a message archive before. Then, how would WS-Reliability position
itself?
> Would it finally "merge" with those similar specifications?

This TC is open and welcomes they join this TC.
I hope they decide to join this TC, rather than
creating another standard in other organization.
Then we can discuss how we update a spec together.

>
> > So if you want to have an infrastructure for B2B,
> > I would recommend to use ebXML, since it has
> > not only messaging, but also BPSS and other
> > useful functions works together.
> > But if you want to use SOAP, WSDL and potentially
> > UDDI as an infrastructure for Web Services,
> > WS-Reliability might be better.
>
>          Now, it comes to the point. ebXML provides ebMS for messaging,
BPSS
> for BP governing, CC for document defintion, Registry for information
> exploration, etc. Then, there are now WS-Reliability for reliable
messaging,
> BPEL4WS (IBM) for orchestrating WS (and there may be other WS-BP language
in
> OASIS soon), UDDI for exploring WS, etc.
>
>          Then, as the functionality of WS becomes more mature, it is quite
> interesting to see that the solutions of ebXML and WS in the corresponding
> protocol stacks seem to be quite similar, i.e., WS-Reliability protocol is
> quite similar to ebMS protocol with just different packaging format.
>
> > WS-Reliability will be able to use with attachments with the version
> > we are working on. So there would be no distinction
> > regarding attachment capability.
>
>          I am sorry that my discussion may be out of the scope of
> WS-Reliability. But these are just the interesting observation or facts.
One
> may still think WS and ebXML are two different things and it is not the
kind
> of choice between the two (just driven by what you must use in order to do
> business). Well, I am just seeking advice of how WS people would use WS in
> business and how they vision their future work.

Interesting discussion. However it looks like better to go on in the more
appropriate list unless someone is eager to discuss it in this list.

Thanks,

Iwasa

>
> Regards,
> CY
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> Ng Chi Yuen, CY.       cyng@cecid.hku.hk       http://www.cecid.hku.hk/
> Technology Officer,
> Centre for E-Commerce Infrastructure Development,
> The University of Hong Kong
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
>
>
> You may leave a Technical Committee at any time by visiting
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/wsrm/members/leave_workgroup.php
>