Re: [soa-rm] What is SOA (Really???)

[Ken Laskey <klaskey@mitre.org>]

see inline

On May 26, 2005, at 8:32 PM, Duane Nickull wrote:

> There are two main areas I think we are starting to and need to  
> maintain focus on.
>
> 1. The core RM graphic - CoreRM8.png has been submitted and Rebekah  
> has submitted a variation of it.

There was also another graphic variation (some of which is included in  
Rebekah's version) distributed as an attachment to the Ken Laskey, May  
23, 6:30 PM email.

>
> 2. The list of key tenets of SOA.
>
> ******************************************
> WRT #1 - we have the graphic scheduled to be discussed next Wednesday  
> during our conference call. I will be on vacation so will need someone  
> to fill in as chair for that meeting.   I would like to call for  
> volunteers in advance.
>
> I will suggest that we try to arrive at consensus before the call.  If  
> not, we need to nail this down.  It is still open to change later, but  
> most of the core work depends on this graphic being agreed upon.
>
> ******************************************
>
> On #2 there are some issues I think we all agree on and some issues  
> that we will need to potentially vote on.
> Ones I hope we agree on (please indicate ONLY if you do NOT agree by  
> responding to this email).
>
> AGREED:
>
> a. The Service Consumer is not part of the RM, it can be part of a RA.  
>  We need to show the transition/relationship between RM and RA  
> somewhere in our documents to fully explain how this relates.

Agree with Rex that there is not consensus on this.

> b. One service (one of any component) is all that will be shown inside  
> the RM, two or more service (or other component) instances can be  
> shown in a subsequent RA or other concrete architecture.
> c. Messaging is not part of the RM but data model is.  RA will show  
> messaging (if we show a consumer in RA, messaging has to be present).   
> We need to discuss in the RM how the Data Model relates to the concept  
> of messaging in the RA or other concrete architecture.

Not sure there is yet consensus on this either.

>
> NOT AGREED (possibly to vote on)
>
> m. Processing model is a core part of service description.  Note that  
> this is different from the concept of orchestration.
> n.  Is a service required to be present for a service description to  
> be valid.  Our current spec does not constrain it tightly enough.
> o. Make an example of something that is not conformant to the SOA RM  
> and explain why.
> p. The name of the TC's work (current is indicated as "Service  
> Oriented Architecture Reference Model").  We should probably set up a  
> ballot to q. vote on this ASAP to put it to rest for once and all.
> r. Scope of RM (probably way too early to tell but worth discussing).  
> Jospeh has entered a comment to discuss this.
> s. Resource - in / out of RM (relevant?)

Given an email archive with pushing 1700 messages, how do we  
effectively cull issues and alternatives?

>
> Duane
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------ 
------------------
Ken Laskey
MITRE Corporation, M/S H305     phone:  703-983-7934
7515 Colshire Drive                        fax:        703-983-1379
McLean VA 22102-7508