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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

bdx message

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

Subject: RE: [bdx] Terminology and Charter / Frame of Reference

Pim et al,


Indeed, the OAGi initiative is definitely related.  I will be at that April meeting, and participating in the afternoon round table session on Cloud Computing and B2B.  I’m told that GXS’ Chief Technology Strategist John Radko (who I know well) is the person giving the morning keynote on the same topic.  It should be an interesting event, if any other BDXers are able to join.


As I mentioned, Cisco has been the main industry promoter of the “Inter-Cloud” vision (via their CTO and others).  In mostly focusing lower down the stack (VM mobility etc), however, in my view Cisco largely misses the potential for data/process interoperability to catalyze a rapid, Internet-scale shift, comparable to what happened in 1995.


The two other items you mention (as well as the separate discussions on the BDX call / list on addressing and SMP/CPP) all seem to me part of a broader question.  And that is: does it makes sense for this TC’s work to align with, leverage, and perhaps profile existing standards work within or coming out of the ebXML stack?  (AS4 being a profile of ebMS 3.0, as I understand it).


I think this TC is fortunate to have as members various folks (such as yourself, Dale, and doubtless others) who are very familiar with the ebXML work.


Best regards,




From: Pim van der Eijk [mailto:pvde@sonnenglanz.net]
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 2:12 PM
To: 'Roger Bass'; bdx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [bdx] Terminology and Charter / Frame of Reference


Interesting ideas, there are several similar initiatives, it will be interesting to see how these evolve and relate to each other.

If anything, it seems to generate an interest in more diverse messaging topologies.


OAG is really focussed on B2B Cloud Computing these days:




As reported previously,  Cisco is positioning AS4 as the preferred messaging layer standard for cloud interoperability.



The ebMS 3.0 Part 3, multi-hop feature defines messaging via a cloud of ebMS SOAP intermediaries, called an "I-Cloud".  It differs from the PEPPOL/BDX model in focussing on (WS-I RSP compliant) end-to-end security and reliable messaging, its intermediaries are more basic than PEPPOL Access Points.   It will be in 2nd public review soon.





From: Roger Bass [mailto:roger@traxian.com]
Sent: 30 March 2011 19:05
To: bdx@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [bdx] Terminology and Charter / Frame of Reference



This issue came up on today’s call (i.e. Dale’s comment on scope really being “interconnect” and Mikkel’s re “4-corner”).  It’s also an agenda item for next time, with Philip presenting, I understand.  Since every standards effort benefits from wider understanding and buy-in, it seems to me this TC would benefit from conforming its terms, and frame of reference, to those more widely used and understood elsewhere in the standards and technology community.


I’d suggest that the two most relevant high-level “anchor” concepts are:

a)      The Inter-Net, and its peering / backbone architecture

b)      The Cloud, where many types of users and systems increasingly are either cloud-based, or have a cloud ‘proxy’


Putting these together, you have the notion of the ‘Inter-Cloud’.  While not yet in common usage, much of its meaning is clear from the obvious references.  It is being used by folks such Cisco’s CTO and Vint Cerf, among other industry luminaries.


It seems to me that “Inter-Cloud Business Document Exchange” would be a more readily understandable term for what this TC is doing.  The “4-corner model” seems a somewhat arcane term, not much known or used outside the e-invoicing/procurement community, and even there, not so much outside Europe.  Adoption of this frame of reference would likely flow through into other terms we discussed (e.g. perhaps “Cloud Peering Point” for “Access Point”).


The Inter-Cloud concept does encompass various other, more IT-centric use cases.  However, eminent commentators such as Vint Cerf (in this post) seem to suggest that data/process interoperability between clouds may be a leading edge use case for the Inter-Cloud.  It seems hard to think of a more widely-relevant use case for such interoperability than the exchange of business documents.


Without in any way changing the scope or charter of the TC’s work, this sets up its work as potentially having much broader relevance – thus helping get buy-in and adoption, in particular from industry leaders.  I’d recall that messaging interconnects between AOL, Compuserve etc in 1995, with the web and browsers on the back of that, were the key events that created the Internet as a mass market phenomenon.  With buy-in from leading “business document clouds”, I believe this TC’s work could help crystallize a similar industry shift.


As part of the agenda item on terminology for the next call, I’d like to propose a discussion of this idea.  If there was general agreement, we might consider changing the name of the TC to “Inter-Cloud Business Document Exchange”.


Best regards,



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