RE: UDDI Business Registry Shutdown and Transition

["Matthew J. Dovey" <matthew.dovey@oucs.ox.ac.uk>]

This is news to me, and in many ways disappointing. I thought one of the
goals of UDDI was to have a global directory, not just an API for
private registries.

In particular this seems a little premature since the v3 UBR never
really made it out of beta. Many of the implementations of UDDI are
still stuck at v2, the fact that the UBR was also effectively stuck at
v2 didn't help. Removing the UBR before a v3 UBR became production
rather than beta sends out the wrong message.

Moreover the current UDDI v3 spec itself mentions the existence of the
UBR in some key areas - namely key generation for publishing across
multiple registries (Section 8). Specifically:

"An important example of a root registry is the UDDI Business Registry,
which has a set of policies in place to generate unique uuidKeys as well
as to validate domainKeys through signatures that correlate with DNS
records.  These policies insure the uniqueness of both domainKeys and
uuidKeys within the UDDI Business Registry, and thus the UBR serves as a
reasonable root registry for many purposes.  In fact, establishing
alternate root registries is not recommended, as this would ultimately
defeat the goal of publishers being able to share data between multiple
registries with an assurance of avoiding a key collision.  By
acknowledging the UDDI Business Registry as a root, an affiliate
registry can establish inter-registry communication policies and
procedures with both the UDDI Business Registry and any other registry
which is an affiliate of the UDDI Business Registry."

Without a UBR providing this feature, this surely undermines the ability
of sharing UDDI information between enterprises? (and in any cases, the
removal of the UBR forces a rewrite of this section).

Matthew

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Hately [mailto:hately@us.ibm.com] 
> Sent: 15 December 2005 08:53
> To: uddi-spec@lists.oasis-open.org
> Cc: luc.clement@systinet.com; colgrave@hursley.ibm.com; 
> Matthew J. Dovey; paul.downey@bt.com; 
> jason.garbis@systinet.com; robko@microsoft.com; 
> pmacias@lmi.org; oleg.mikulinsky@weblayers.com; 
> dave.prout@bt.com; Tony.Rogers@ca.com; shamik.sharma@soa.com; 
> Claus von Riegen; alan.wu@oracle.com
> Subject: UDDI Business Registry Shutdown and Transition
> 
> 
> RESENDING, copying all members directly in CC: list since I 
> have not seen earlier message via the uddi-spec TC mailing list. 
> 
> 
> To: Members and Observers of the OASIS UDDI Specification 
> Technical Committee 
> 
> With the approval of UDDI V3 earlier this year, and the 
> momentum it has achieved in market adoption, IBM, Microsoft 
> and SAP have evaluated the status of the UDDI Business 
> Registry and determined it has achieved the goals for the 
> project.  Given this, we announced today to  users of the 
> UDDI Business Registry  that it will be discontinued as of 
> Jan. 12, 2006.  We believe the success of  UDDI was 
> significantly enhanced by the existence of UBR for proof of 
> concept and testing.  IBM, Microsoft and SAP are pleased to 
> have contributed to the creation of this standard and its 
> successful progress in the industry.  We particularly 
> appreciate the support and ongoing commitment of  the OASIS 
> organization and the UDDI TC members. 
> 
> The base FAQ document that will be posted to our websites is 
> also attached.  This FAQ may be amended by each company for 
> specifics related to the announcement.   
> 
> 
> 
> 
> SAP, IBM and Microsoft continue to be active members of the 
> OASIS UDDI Specification TC and their participation in that 
> group is not affected by this announcement.  Thanks again for 
> your support during the UDDI Business Registry project and we 
> look forward to ongoing development and discussion in this 
> Technical Committee. 
> 
> Regards, 
> 
> Andrew Hately
> Acting Managing Director, UDDI Business Registry IBM Software 
> Group, Emerging Technologies
> email: hately@us.ibm.com
>