[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] [soa-ra] why or why not composition needs to addressed
OK, Joe, questions just for you (unless anyone else wants to pipe in):
- What is the hang-up for getting BPEL out? I remember one of the
rationales for submitting BPEL to OASIS instead of W3C was W3C takes
too long. However, WS-CDL finishes Candidate Rec testing at the end
of this month (but I have no insight whether any problems were
uncovered to slow further advancement).
- Part of the WS-CDL spec is a formal model based on pi calculus that
is the basis of the spec content. I believe BPEL had a formal model
in the beginning. Does it still?
- Your write-up links BPEL to WSDL 1.1 constructs. Is there any
thought of mapping to WSDL 2.0 (also in CR)?
- Is there a more detailed write-up that goes into the type of
process control that BPEL is intended to represent and what is
outside its scope? For example, must the decision making be done
within the BPEL engine or can it make external calls to more
sophisticated decision support capabilities?
- Orchestration represents central control while choreography is more
peer-to-peer. Do you know of anything that discusses when you would
use one rather than the other? For example, I could imagine a
choreography where some peers were more equal than others and the
limit would look like orchestration. OTOH, I could imagine an
orchestration where the main engine delegates control and, in the
limit, you really lose site of a central control. Are these naive
suppositions that may be doable in theory but prohibitive to implement?
Just getting started but have to leave for another meeting :-)
Ken
At 02:15 PM 3/15/2006, you wrote:
>Here's an article from May 2005: (I think you will recognize the
>author;)
>
>http://bpmfocus.com/2005/06/01/story.html?xrap=y&story=Get_Ready_WS-BPEL
>.xml&title=Articles%20:%20Get%20Ready%20for%20WS-BPEL
>
>Please note that the schedule for BPEL has since changed - the first
>paragraph of this article reflects the schedule as conveyed by the BPEL
>TC chairs at the time of the article.
>
>Joe
>
>Joseph Chiusano
>Associate
>Booz Allen Hamilton
>
>700 13th St. NW, Suite 1100
>Washington, DC 20005
>O: 202-508-6514
>C: 202-251-0731
>Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Ken Laskey [mailto:klaskey@mitre.org]
>Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2006 2:06 PM
>To: Francis McCabe
>Cc: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
>Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] [soa-ra] why or why not composition needs to
>addressed
>
>Frank,
>
>I haven't gone through any details of BPEL in a long time but my
>uninformed instinct is that BPEL is a small and insufficient subset of
>what is needed.
>
>Is there a good BPEL reference (or a stable spec) to look at to confirm
>or disprove my assumptions? I'd like to look at some BPEL info and then
>try to further flesh out the traffic cop in an RA context.
>
>Ken
>
>At 01:51 PM 3/15/2006, Francis McCabe wrote:
> >Ken:
> > What you are talking about is orchestration. The traffic cop is (of
> >course) the key driver for BPEL.
> > At the moment I am not I would want to mandate that all SOAs have
> >this kind of organization. At the same time we should be able to
> >clearly identify where in the RA such a cop would sit (stand) directing
>
> >the traffic.
> > There are some echoes here with intermediary processing too..
> >Frank
> >
> >On Mar 15, 2006, at 7:49 AM, Ken Laskey wrote:
> >
> >>My apologies for falling back to email rather than the wiki but I am
> >>trying to get some percolating ideas down quickly in a familiar
> >>format.
> >>
> >>Composition needs to be looked at in the context of not just how you
> >>would specify the combination of more atomic services into a higher
> >>level one, but also the behavior models and the
> >>orchestration/choreography that results in generating real world
> >>effects. An implemented SOA needs a "traffic cop" process/service to
> >>- accept requests,
> >>- decide what needs to be done with the request,
> >>- rout the request or derived requests to other services,
> >>- collect the results of other services,
> >>- decide on next actions based on behavior model and responses to
> >>routed requests,
> >>- continue this until the initial request is satisfied or terminated,
> >>- package and send results to receiver designated by original
> >>requester (where receiver possibly *not* the requester).
> >>
> >>The traffic cop will make use of known compositions to make sure
> >>routing is done properly and for error recovery. Whatever the traffic
>
> >>cop decides, it will probably be captured internally as a service
> >>composition and corresponding behavior model. This is likely a useful
>
> >>format for logging and future audits. It also gives a basis for
> >>evaluating levels of service and identifying bottlenecks.
> >>
> >>So in summary, I think composition is a fundamental part of the
> >>reference architecture but in the context of how the composition
> >>description is used rather than the description itself.
> >>
> >>Ken
> >>
> >>
> >>----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>--------------------
> >>Ken Laskey
> >>MITRE Corporation, M/S H305 phone: 703-983-7934
> >>7515 Colshire Drive fax: 703-983-1379
> >>McLean VA 22102-7508
> >
>
>--
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>---------
> / Ken
>Laskey \
> | MITRE Corporation, M/S H305 phone: 703-983-7934 |
> | 7515 Colshire Drive fax: 703-983-1379 |
> \ McLean VA 22102-7508
>/
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>----------
--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
/ Ken
Laskey \
| MITRE Corporation, M/S H305 phone: 703-983-7934 |
| 7515 Colshire Drive fax: 703-983-1379 |
\ McLean VA 22102-7508 /
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]