[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Why do we need SOA? (proposal for Introduction text)
Sally: Thank you for this input. My main concerns were simply from a very pragmatic standpoint. If we come up with a model that we all agree is SOA, SOA implementations that are conformant with it (* we still need to consider) are SOA ipso facto; regardless of where they are deployed (business, enterprise, government, etc.). To compare two identical implementations and state one is SOA because is it deployed by an enterprise or business and the other is not solely for that reason would be illogical (I am sounding like Mr. Spock??) I do see a large value in writing other collateral specific (reference architectures) for those groups based on the core RM. Duane Sally St. Amand wrote: > Duane & Joe > > I am using the term business as a synonym for the functional > specialist. And since we are talking about enterprise organizations > (which creates another definitional issue) the people associated with > this role are ‘general manager’ types. I include govt agencies and > even non profits because as Martin has said it is the mission, or to > put it another way: the reason that the organization exists. For a > corporation it is to make money and therefore to provide periodic > financial returns (as well as appreciation) to shareholders. For > privately held companies it is the same concept but we change the > literal use of words a bit eg instead of shareholders it could be > stakeholders. > > My point is actually 2 because we are going into unchartered waters > the actual selection of words is more refined than usual and second > constructing a SOA-RM requires the involvement of the functional > specialist eg the people whose knowledge base covers the enterprise > (business, govt,etc). > > Enterprise also poses a problem as a word. In Martin’s list #1 is > multiple management domains. One of the purposes of SOA is to provide > certainity to management domains that want to interoperate beyond > their domain, that is beyond what can be controlled. Isn’t that the > reason for standards? You cann’t control so you agree on methods, > protocols … Of course you need to be certain you are agreeing to the > same thing otherwise IT DOESN’T WORK! (I just had a flashback of prior > experiences, sorry) > > Getting common understanding is hard work and will necessitate a focus > on semantics, which we are grappling with now. > > I see SOA as hydra headed. My view is that constructing service > oriented architecture is helped by a SOA Reference Model because > handing off requirements is part of the problem. A reference model is > also a methodology for execution as well as a template for creating > the architecture. > > Sally > > > > Duane Nickull <dnickull@adobe.com> wrote: > > I would object to any statement or notion that made SOA only SOA > in the > context of 'business', however I think I understand the intent of the > statement and agree. Business is one type of user. Department of > Homeland Security is not a business yet they ill have SOA (at least > Martin hasn't tried to sell me anything yet ;-) > > Perhaps we could re-state it as an IT need, written in a way that > speaks > to business and government users. This is harder than it appears > and I > failed at it miserably but would love to hear your guys take. > > Something like (but not) this: > > "SOA is an architectural model developed to enable those who build > and > maintain IT systems to repurpose components rapidly for new > functionality. This enables them to respond quickly and in an > economically efficient manner to new requirements" > > Does that make sense? > > Duane > > Chiusano Joseph wrote: > > > Sally, > > > > I like your comment regarding SOA being a response for business, > and I > > believe it is completely true. A general question for us: Since > we are > > approaching SOA from the technical perspective (at least that is my > > understanding), wouldn't it be out of our scope to refer to the > > business aspects of SOA (i.e. that SOA encapsulates business > services > > in....etc. etc.)? > > > > Joe > > > > Joseph Chiusano > > Booz Allen Hamilton > > Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > From: Sally St. Amand [mailto:sallystamand@yahoo.com] > > Sent: Sunday, May 08, 2005 9:17 PM > > To: Smith, Martin; soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org > > Subject: Re: [soa-rm] Why do we need SOA? (proposal for > > Intro! duction text) > > > > Martin > > I like your thoughts and agree that SOA is a response to the > > characteristics of the internet that you list. I also think SOA is > > a response for business. > > We need to answer your question, otherwise SOA will be ( or is > > already ) viewed as a marketing ploy > > See additional thoughts below. > > Sally > > > > > > > > "Smith, Martin" wrote: > > > > List - - > > > > I sent essentially this same message in the thread "[soa-rm] > > When Is An SOA Really An SOA?" a while back, but got no > > response. Thought I'd try again to see if no-one noticed it or > > no-one liked it . . . > > > > I'm proposing we include something like the following in the > > Introduction. As several people have observed, we all tended > > to jump right in to the details of "what is an SOA" without > > nailing down the answer to the "why should I [! the reader] > > care?" question. As we learned in the f2f discussion, many of > > us on the TC care because it's our job to explain to others > > why we all seem to think we need this 'SOA' thing (other than > > that it keeps being in the news!) I'm guessing that if we can > > understand why SOA has become a buzzword, we'll clarify the > > "essential definition" question. > > > > So, here's what I think is driving SOA: > > > > "The SOA concept has emerged in response to the need for an > > approach to application architecture that is well adapted to > > the I! nternet environment. > > > > SOA is a strategy that organizes an enterprises functionality > > as services that can be aggregated and/or reused in order to > > achieve business goal(s). To take advantage of services over > > the internet there has to be the ability to understand, > > discover, combine and use the services that reside within the > > enterprise or anywhere on the internet. > > > > The Internet has revolutionized personal communications with > > e-mail, and "B-to-C" transactions with the World-Wide Web. > > Following the exploitation path of other technologies, the > > Internet may be expected to have a similar revolutionary > > effect on "B-to-B" transactions - - automating > > system-to-system exchanges - - and this domain may eventually > > be several times larger in scale that the "B-to-C" space. > > > > The characteristics of the Internet environment to which the > > SOA concept responds are: > > > > 1. Multiple management domains.--Business or other entities > > "on the 'Net" each have their own set of policies and > > procedures, and they are legal peers so there is little or no > > "top down governance" in the environment; > > > > 2. Heterogeneous technologies, semantics and processes; > > 3. A very large and dynamic "mar! ketplace" of potential service > > providers and consumers.--Unlike the environment within a > > single organization, there may be many alternative providers > > of a computing service, and available services may change on a > > minute-by-minute basis; > > > > 4. Lack of standard context.--Within a single organization, > > there is normally a body of "well-known" information about > > what resources are available, how they may be obtained, what > > standards or conventions they follow, specific interface > > details, reliability of the resource, payment requirements, if > > any, etc. In the environment of a single computer, the > > unknowns are even fewer. Because of the size and diversity of > > the Internet, obtaining this information is a much larger problem. > > > > 5. Lack of infrastructure services.--The Internet provides > > some basic services, but on a "best-efforts" basis. Thus > > issues like quality-of se! rvice and security require must be > > addressed more explicitly than in single-computer or > > local-network environments. > > > > Application architectures that call themselves "SOA" provide a > > solution to these issues of the Internet environment. There is > > nothing to prevent implemen! ting an SOA within a local > > network, on a single computing platform, or even in a > > non-technical environment like a human household, but the need > > for SOA is driven by the opportunity for exploiting the > > worldwide connectivity provided by the Internet." > > > > Martin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: John Harby [mailto:jharby@gmail.com] > > Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 12:05 PM > > To: soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org > > Subject: Re: [soa-rm] When Is An SOA Really An SOA? > > > > This seem to be an issue for defining "Reference Model! ". Does > > this > > reference model provide a litmus test for architectures to > > determine > > whether or not they follow SOA? > > > > On 5/5/05, Chiusano Joseph wrote: > > > This question has been on my mind for quite some time, and I > > would like now > > > to put it in the context of our in-process RM. > > > > > > In the past, I have pondered the following more specific > > question (please ! > > > note that this is all scoped to Web Services-based SOA for > > ease of > > > explanation): > > > > > > If I have 2 Web Services that communicate, do I have an SOA? > > > > > > We can say "certainly not!". One can do point-to-point > > integration with Web > > > Services just as easily (to a certain degree) as without, > > with redundant Web > > > Services rather than shared Web Services (a violation of one > > of the > > > foundational ten! ets of SOA, which is shared services). > > > > > > Now let's say that we have 2 Web Services that each conform > > to the SOA > > > Architectural Model in Figure 1 of our most recent draft. > > There is a data > > > model, a policy, a contract, etc. > > > > > > Add to that our definition of SOA on line 470, in which we > > (correctly) state > > > that SOA is a form of Enterprise Architecture, which (at > > least in my mind) > > > implies enterprise-level benefits. > > > > > > Q: Given the last scenario above (2 Web Se! rvices that each > > conform to the > > > SOA Architectural Model ) and our definition of SOA: Is this > > scenario > > > large-scale enough that it *really* meets our definition? > > IOW, how > > > large-scale does an "instance" that conforms to our RM have > > to be to yield > > > benefits on an enterprise scale? Do we need to stipulate! > > something regarding > > > this for our RM? > > > > > > Joe > > > > > > > > > > > > Joseph Chiusano > > > > > > Booz Allen Hamilton > > > > > > Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com > > > > > > > > > > -- > *********** > Senior Standards Strategist - Adobe Systems, Inc. - > http://www.adobe.com > Chair - OASIS Service Oriented Architecture Reference Model > Technical Committee - > http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=soa-rm > Vice Chair - UN/CEFACT Bureau Plenary - http://www.unece.org/cefact/ > Adobe Enterprise Developer Resources - > http://www.adobe.com/enterprise/developer/main.html > *********** > -- *********** Senior Standards Strategist - Adobe Systems, Inc. - http://www.adobe.com Chair - OASIS Service Oriented Architecture Reference Model Technical Committee - http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=soa-rm Vice Chair - UN/CEFACT Bureau Plenary - http://www.unece.org/cefact/ Adobe Enterprise Developer Resources - http://www.adobe.com/enterprise/developer/main.html ***********
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]