Re: [soa-rm] another possible SOA diagram (revised)

[Ken Laskey <klaskey@mitre.org>]

The resource is the implementation that in many cases was created to 
satisfy needs outside the SOA and only becomes part of a SOA in the 
same way that any software package becomes part of your computer.  
Opacity says you know there is a resource but the only thing you know 
about it is what is exposed through the service description.

Attached is a very quick attempt to include in Duane's last diagram.

Ken

Core6RM (KJL).pdf

On May 23, 2005, at 9:18 AM, Christopher Bashioum wrote:

>  OK - that makes sense.  In fact, I remember a book on SOA patterns  
> that
> talks about this (forgot the title, but the author is Paul Monday).   
> In his
> view, what you are referring to as a service he would refer to as an
> architecture adapter.  I.e., the implementation (resource) is done in a
> particular architural style.  In order to adapt that implementation to  
> the
> SOA architectural style one would us an architecture adapter.  (at  
> least
> that's what I got from his book - I may have misunderstood).
>
> So ... A second question for you -  do you think we need to add a  
> resource
> box to the diagram that Duane sent out?  If so, what would be the
> relationship between the resource and the service?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken Laskey [mailto:klaskey@mitre.org]
> Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 9:11 AM
> To: Christopher Bashioum
> Cc: 'SOA-RM'
> Subject: Re: [soa-rm] another possible SOA diagram (revised)
>
> The resource is the real thing out there that provides a capability --
> in the 07 draft, there is a discussion of data resources vs. processing
> resources.  In general, a resource does not have to be service-enabled.
>   However for SOA, the resource must have (we can continue to debate
> this) a service interface that is one of the things published through
> the service description, and that service interface is how you connect
> the resource to the underlying service infrastructure.  Additionally,
> the service infrastructure has to provide certain TBD capabilities and
> likely overlaps but is not necessarily the same as what is often termed
> an ESB bus.
>
> Ken
>
> On May 23, 2005, at 8:53 AM, Christopher Bashioum wrote:
>
>> Ken,
>>
>> Intuitively, I like this one.  One question: how is the resource
>> different
>> than the service?  Also, for the TC to use, we may be able to identify
>> the
>> essential elements with a * and then the other optional elements to
>> show
>> where they fit (for example, I see basic logging as non-essential, but
>> this
>> diagram shows where it fits).
>>
>> The diagram may not show up in the actual RM doc, but it may be useful
>> for
>> us as a conceptual model.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Ken Laskey [mailto:klaskey@mitre.org]
>> Sent: Monday, May 23, 2005 12:43 AM
>> To: 'SOA-RM'
>> Subject: [soa-rm] another possible SOA diagram (revised)
>>
>> I played with the ideas in the sketch a bit more.  As noted in the
>> previous email:
>>
>> I would not necessarily advocate it being used instead of the one  
>> Duane
>> drew but given I had it, I thought I'd pass it around for comments.
>> The 3D presentation may make it look too concrete but I was looking  
>> for
>> a way to show there was something SOA I was building services on and
>> there could be any number of services.  Note a resource could be a
>> registry but even that would be exposed through services and have
>> metadata.
>>
>> 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