[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [soa-rm] David Linthicum Says: "ESB versus Fabric.Stop It!"
Is it the responsibility of the service to be orchestratable or
is it
the responsibility of the orchestrator to conform? ;)
On
5/25/05, Christopher Bashioum <cbashioum@mitre.org> wrote:
>
Good point. However, I would still say that SOA does not care if
>
orchestration is actually done or not, only that the services are
>
orchestratable.
>
> There are many SOA implementations that do not
currently have any
> orchestration, though they do have
aggregation.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From:
Metz Rebekah [mailto:metz_rebekah@bah.com]
>
Sent: Wednesday, May 25, 2005 5:01 PM
> To:
soa-rm@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [soa-rm] David Linthicum Says:
"ESB versus Fabric.Stop It!"
>
> > Can I ask you what would make
a single service care that the consumer
> is
> > invoking it as
part of an orchestration? Why should the service care.
> > It's
function is simply to facilitate the invocation request. If
> >
someone created a dependency on the service to know about the state of
>
> other service invocation requests, that would be very bad
architecture
> > IMO and also violate the principles of autonomicity
(not really an
> > English word but you get the idea).
>
>
Ah! So here lies an important distinction that gets back to the
>
house/community analogy - and what makes SOA a SOA? Is SOA == the
house
> or is SOA == community? A single service probably wouldn't
care whether
> or not it is being invoked as part of an orchestration,
much like a
> house doesn't care if it is in a planned development or
urban
> development or a cornfield or an island. But, a SOA may very
well care
> about it, much like a community cares about things like the
positioning
> of individual houses and green space (which don't directly
related to an
> individual house).
>
>
> > I will
propose that we accept this axiom:
> >
> > "Services should
not have to have explicit knowledge of the states of
> > other services
called by a consumer that invokes them"
>
> So this goes back to the
service as an operational concept, and I think
> leads me to think that we
are working toward a definition at the
> "community" level and not at the
"house" level.
>
>
Rebekah
>
>
>
>
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]