RE: [wsbpel] Q: guidelines for reliability?

[David RR Webber - XML ebusiness <Gnosis_@compuserve.com>]

Martin,

The CPA works both ways - its flexible.  You have a
bi-party agreement - with both in it - or separate one - where you
basically say - this is my configuration - bolts yours onto it
as needed.

You can also par it down to a bare minimum - and / or just
create a fixed BPEL profile - where all the QoS and so on
are fixed values - so all the users have to enter is their
company information, the BPEL process name, some 
business transactions (if applicable) and the port config'
address for the server.

I already have that level of abstraction done with a GUI - 
because that's what customers want - canned out the box -
drag and drop simple.

We can certainly create that non-normative CPA for BPEL
and then its ready and easily tweakable by each vendor
as they need.

The vital thing is that all the heavy lifting has been done 
over the past four years in building the CPA schema so
it has all the right fine detail built into it under the hood.

Cheers, DW.
=====================================================
Message text written by "Martin Chapman"
> 
Conceptually cpa is interesting, but does it actually work with wsdl based
web services?
Also don't both parties need to have a CPA defintion? If so, isn't this a
huge overkill for the simple clients invoking a bpel process? 
Surely all that is needed in this case is a very simple "requires/supports"
type mechnism advertised by the process (or wsdl), found in ejb,  and not a
complicated negotiation process.
 
Martin.
<