RE: updated service description

[michael.poulin@uk.fid-intl.com]

ServiceDescription doc contains a QUESTION: WHERE IN THE RA WILL WE TALK ABOUT STATE? TO WHAT EXTENT DO WE FOLLOW A WEB MODEL AND PASS ALL STATE INFORMATION AROUND VS. HAVING AN INSTANCE OF THE PROCESS TO WHICH THE CONSUMER NEEDS TO RECONNECT TO MAKE USE OF SAVED STATE?

Here are a few considerations on this topic.

1.	Web Model discards all other SOA implementation and requires serious code management to protect state information from being overloaded with execution context information, and is the serious subject for security concerns. This is my observation of daily development practice in my Web Delivery group.

2.	The more generic solution is the state provider the consumer needs to reconnect. Reasons: 

a.	state quality/persistence may be controlled by the provider vs. unknown circumstances of the consumer (where state has to be maintained between service invocations); 
b.	state security may be better controlled on the provider side (single point of control); 
c.	consumer and communication channel are freed from state integrity controls and protections;
d.	allows for stateful interaction model, if needed
e.	allows for better management in service aggregation and orchestration
f.	does not preclude a Web Model to be used by ignoring the state provider (aka setting the state provider to NULL); opposite is not true because state provider gets missed in the Web Model totally.

- Michael