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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

soa-rm-ra message

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


Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] Groups - Modification of Policy_Contract_Business diagram (OASIS_Policy-Contract_Diagram.JPG) uploaded


We have both chickens and eggs.  They both were derived from bad
dinosaur DNA. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Duane Nickull [mailto:dnickull@adobe.com] 
Sent: Monday, May 07, 2007 6:33 PM
To: Danny Thornton; Francis McCabe
Cc: michael.poulin@uk.fid-intl.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] Groups - Modification of
Policy_Contract_Business diagram (OASIS_Policy-Contract_Diagram.JPG)
uploaded

Is it legal UML to allow either side to be aggregated from the other?
For
some reason, this seems illogical.  A can be aggregated by one or more
"B's"
which in turn are aggregated from one or more "A's".  Chicken and egg.

Duane






On 5/7/07 11:16 AM, "Danny Thornton" <danny_thornton2@yahoo.com> wrote:

> We have stated that a policy may reference contracts and contracts may

> reference policies. This is represented by the attached class diagram 
> "Policy Contract Relationship 1".  Duane's statements below follow the

> attached class diagram "Policy Contract GOF Composite Pattern".  Would

> it be more accurate to model policies and contracts as distinct and 
> separate entities as defined in "Policy Contract Relationship 2"? The 
> difference in the models is whether we say a contract is a set of 
> policies which contains a set of propositions or whether the set of 
> propositions are part of either a contract or a policy.
> 
> Danny
> 
> --- Duane Nickull <dnickull@adobe.com> wrote:
> 
>> Correct.
>> 
>> Policy - unilateral constraint declarations which , if not observed, 
>> may result in denial of service interaction.
>> 
>> Contract - a bilateral or multilateral agreement to be bound by the 
>> terms of one or more set(s) of policies.
>> 
>> Duane
>> 
>> 
>> On 5/5/07 11:11 AM, "Francis McCabe"
>> <frankmccabe@mac.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> A quick follow up,
>>> 
>>> It is also not fair to say that a contract is
>> *more* than a policy.
>>> 
>>> The distinction between them refers to the origin
>> of the constraint:
>>> a policy originates with a single participant (or
>> proxy etc.) a
>>> contract originates in an agreement between
>> participants.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On May 5, 2007, at 11:07 AM, Francis McCabe wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Again, I need to get completely clear on
>> something:
>>>> 
>>>> It is *not* reasonable to state:
>>>> 
>>>> Contract is not only more than a Policy but also
>> more than a SLA
>>>> 
>>>> In some limited areas, you may constrain SLAs to
>> focus on things
>>>> like bandwidth etc., but other businesses will
>> use SLAs to govern
>>>> things like business opening hours, response
>> times for service and
>>>> so on.
>>>> 
>>>> So, again, I do not yet see a particularly strong
>> case for
>>>> distinguishing SLAs from contracts.
>>>> 
>>>> Certainly for our architecture we need to be as
>> encompassing as
>>>> required to support business via services, not
>> simply to build yet
>>>> another IT infrastructure.
>>>> 
>>>> Frank
>>>> 
>>>> On May 5, 2007, at 10:53 AM,
>> michael.poulin@uk.fid-intl.com wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I have a strong impression that in our March
>> discussion about
>>>>> Contract & Policies we  have agreed that
>> Contract is not only more
>>>>> than a Policy but also more than a SLA. The SLA
>> is explicitly
>>>>> measurable (run-time) set of service
>> attributes/characteristics/
>>>>> actions while a Contract can contain Commitments
>> of the contract
>>>>> participants that 1) are not visible through the
>> service
>>>>> interface; 2) may be not measured at run-time. I
>> guess, it is the
>>>>> time for me to show my version of a Service
>> Contract Template we
>>>>> are discussing in my organisation ( I will be
>> able to do it not
>>>>> earlier than on Tuesday next week).
>>>>> 
>>>>> I have described an example of such contract  in
>> my article "Does
>>>>> Web Services makes a Service for SOA?" In
>> particular, a service
>>>>> provider was obliged to gather audit info on all
>> actions requested
>>>>> by particular client and failed in it because
>> its database was not
>>>>> available for some time and several audit
>> messages got lost.
>>>>> If we are building high level RA, we cannot
>> discard the scenario
>>>>> I've just described.
>>>>> That is, Contract is an agreed container of all
>> service related
>>>>> actions performed by the provider's SW
>> system(s). With such
>>>>> definition, I do know what to do in IT with
>> Service Contract.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Nevertheless, I am still unclear on
>> Contract-Policy relationship
>>>>> issue...
>>>>> 
>>>>> - Michael
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com



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