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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

asap message

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


Subject: RE: [asap] from the OMA TP meeting in London, UK


In my opinion the mentioned WS specs focuses some of the Asynchrnous 
features that are important to them
to do their core activities.
WSRM - focuses on message guarantee, ordering and duplicate elimination etc.
CAF - focuses on correlating and coordinating the work between the 
participant services
WSBPEL - gives slots to hook with WS-COORDINATION for correlation
ASYNC - focuses on continuous response, control and monitoring.
Personally I don't see ASYNC competing here with any spec. Unfortunately 
there is less coordination and no well defined
stack among various WS specs.
I agree with Michael that we are such a small group and probably we should 
come up clearly
how the ASYNC  is complement to other specs.

Regards
Mayilraj

At 03:31 PM 11/11/2003 -0500, Sodhi, Gavenraj S wrote:
>Michael,
>
>ASAP, in the method we are specifying is very complementary to SPML
>(Service Provisioning Markup Language) and in turn when we are using
>other technologies like SAML and WS-S.  ASAP would enable me to have
>continuous response from web services requests (for Provisioning via
>SPML) of objects across domains involved in complex requests that
>involve approvals, workflow, and may have latency.
>
>I may not be interested to the other facets of overbundling of
>technologies as other initiatives may offer.  ASAP is quite valuable.
>
>My $0.02
>
>Cheers,
>
>-Raj
>
>
>Gavenraj Sodhi, MBA
>Computer Associates
>Product Manager, eTrust
>Mobile:  +1 949 350 8808
>gavenraj.sodhi@ca.com
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Michael Shenfield [mailto:mshenfield@rim.net]
>Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 12:26 PM
>To: Sodhi, Gavenraj S; Jeffrey Ricker
>Cc: ASAP
>Subject: RE: [asap] from the OMA TP meeting in London, UK
>
>Sodhi,
>As these three committees are dealing with "high level" specs they make
>certain assumptions on behavior and definitions of async web services.
>For example WSBPEL spec defines how to process correlation, deals with
>cases of multiple correlation, correlation violations, etc. Unless we
>review prior specs we are running a danger of overlap/conflict.
>The effort certainly depends on availability and time commitment of the
>group.
>Cheers,
>
>Mike
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Sodhi, Gavenraj S [mailto:Gavenraj.Sodhi@ca.com]
>Sent: November 11, 2003 3:06 PM
>To: Michael Shenfield; Jeffrey Ricker
>Cc: ASAP
>Subject: RE: [asap] from the OMA TP meeting in London, UK
>
>
>Can you elaborate on the work WSRM, CAF, and WSBPEL are doing that may
>send ASAP in a crash course with them?  This would allow us to go
>through and discuss and debate the areas we may be complementary.  For
>myself, I probably could not make the F2F in December because of
>personal obligations but it would provide me tools to take back to CA to
>better understand if we may be able to reuse efforts from other
>initiatives, if they are duplicative.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Raj
>
>Gavenraj Sodhi, MBA
>Computer Associates
>Product Manager, eTrust
>Mobile:  +1 949 350 8808
>gavenraj.sodhi@ca.com
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Michael Shenfield [mailto:mshenfield@rim.net]
>Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2003 11:48 AM
>To: Jeffrey Ricker
>Cc: ASAP
>Subject: [asap] from the OMA TP meeting in London, UK
>
>or rather from the pub at Hilton Metropole where the OMA (Open Mobile
>Alliance) TP is going on :)
>
>This week I am attending OMA TP meetings in UK and went for drinks and
>chat with MWS people from Microsoft and IBM. When discussing async web
>services I mentioned OASIS ASAP and asked why they ignore it. They
>replied that both companies are concerned that there are already 3 OASIS
>groups that refer to async services in the specs (WSRM, CAF, WSBPEL) and
>as their specs are close to completion they're afraid that ASAP will
>either reinvent the wheel or go in the opposite direction.
>
>I think it is a very good point and we should first carefully analyze
>all AWS related references in other OASIS specs before issuing working
>draft or defining scope, etc. Typically this is done through liaison
>reports or F2F meetings for review and discussion. Unless we go through
>this exercise, I don't think we can count on wide adoption of ASAP given
>the small size of the group and lack of participation from industry
>heavyweights. I propose to have a F2F meeting (2 days) on the second
>week of December and resolve the major issues. I can host the meeting in
>my Toronto office but would prefer iWay to host it in NYC so I'll have a
>chance to meet my former IBI/iWay peers :)
>Cheers,
>
>Mike
>
>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
>the OASIS TC), go to
>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/asap/members/leave_workgrou
>p.php.
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of
>the OASIS TC), go to
>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/asap/members/leave_workgrou
>p.php.
>
>
>
>To unsubscribe from this mailing list (and be removed from the roster of 
>the OASIS TC), go to 
>http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/asap/members/leave_workgroup.php.



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