[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [wsdm] wsee requirments in mows
To me
this requirement clearly belongs to Application + Systems Management. Why is it
important for MOWS in the first run? We want to address federated management of
WSs through which messages are flowing and identify what is required for that.
I do not think that this kind of fine-grained manageability
information is required for federated management. For other cases, each
particular manager can do root cause analysis and easily match what Web
applications WSs belong to and manage WebApp environment, but that is not MOWS,
that is MUWS, if you will.
This
belongs to MUWS which is to devise a way to manage various resources
and represent their relationships. WS is one and WSE is another
resource. Therefore, may be we should have MOWSE requirements
someday.
I'm
also not yet clear that there is a way to actually uniquely identify WSE for a
given WS without getting down to App+System+Networks management. What if
services are geographically spread in an "akamai"-sort of environment. What
would be the WSE there? What if it is a load balanced farm, etc.? What would be
that "entity which directly
hosts an execution instance" in these cases?
Then,
there is no definition of an execution instance in the MOWS requirements
document yet. There has to be one to include definitions that you
proposed.
In WS terms, a
client hits an endpoint with a request and cares only if that has, will, or
would do properly to the agreement. It's the WS's side manager's responsibility
to dig through instances, servlets, app servers, etc. to resolve issues. The
later can be done today and may be improved with standardization, the former
needs standardization or it will not work at all.
-- Igor
Sedukhin .. (igor.sedukhin@ca.com)
|
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]