RE: [soa-rm-ra] Management Model section after comments of this week

Do you see events manageability as service invocation manageability? I do not think I see it this way

On everything else,

Let’s see we agree to disagree

What you call composability I call dependence – see IBM’s service model – a service can have both interfaces and dependencies

For me also, business performance requires SLA

From: mpoulin@usa.com [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 5:18 PM
To: boris.lublinsky@navteq.com; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [soa-rm-ra] Management Model section after comments of this week

Boris, at a glance:

Event Monitoring Manageability is mandatory IMO because it is not about notifications but about managing selection of events that trigger the services.
I do not understand "Dependency manageability" because service do not depend on other services; instead, they depend on functionality of an arbitrary trusted provider (IBM Dynamic Process Edition allowed having a 'basket' of potential providers where the process picked up the actual one when needed on the fly 9not a discovery mechanism); no end-points were configured up-front). This is not a programmatic dependency, which many would read into.
Combination or Composability Management is about managing combinations of services that might be realised w/ or w/o configuration, i.e. via design (composition) or orchestration (aggregation), by both service provider and consumer. The fact that existing BPM tools require configuration does not mean that they are the only possible ways of doing combinations. Also, do not forget about business domain where a service combination may requires just a new organisational chart :-)
Business Performance and Service Level Agreement are very different things, e.g. the former may have monetary expression while the latter - pure technical expression. Also, the best technical expressions (measurements and matrix) do not necessary lead to the best monetary expressions.

- Michael

-----Original Message-----
From: Lublinsky, Boris <boris.lublinsky@navteq.com>
To: mpoulin@usa.com <mpoulin@usa.com>; soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org <soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Wed, Mar 30, 2011 5:58 pm
Subject: RE: [soa-rm-ra] Management Model section after comments of this week

Here is my manageability proposal:

· Lifecycle Manageability

· Configuration manageability

o Dependency manageability

· Policies Manageability

· Contracts manageability

· Business Performance manageability

o SLA Manageability

Event Monitoring Manageability is really about reporting and should not be there

From: mpoulin@usa.com [mailto:mpoulin@usa.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 5:52 AM
To: soa-rm-ra@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [soa-rm-ra] Management Model section after comments of this week

Folks,

I have incorporated all comments and chnages into attached document. In some places, I have repeated the text (in different font) just to save and show the comments that I responeded insted but didn't change the text.

I am not sure what tactics we prefer now - to go through all left comments together in the meeting or for me to resolve each comment with particular author (in some cases I disagree with the comment, however).

Cheers,

- Michael

The information contained in this communication may be CONFIDENTIAL and is intended only for the use of the recipient(s) named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify the sender and delete/destroy the original message and any copy of it from your computer or paper files.

soa-rm-ra message