On Tue, 24 May 2005, Ivan R.Judson wrote: > Hey John, > > Good point. Although my skepticism keeps nagging with the worry, "Why bother > with WSRF/GT4 services, aren't Web Services good enough?" I suspect they > are, I haven't seen any significant value to the layers above that provided > by GT4.
If you try and ignore the globus stuff, and think of it as WSRF it becomes more pleasant. GT4 contains lots of crap for submitting jobs and managing resources, copying files about etc. I have no immediate interest in any of that. WSRF is the OASIS working draft for stateful web services, and as such is intended to be something nice and generic, usable whenever you want state in a web service. The most important part of it as I'm concerned (if you were entertaining the notion of AG with web services) would be WS-Resource and WS-Notifications. http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsrf/2005/03/wsrf-WS-Resource-1.2-draft-03.pdf http://docs.oasis-open.org/wsn/2004/06/wsn-WS-BaseNotification-1.2-draft-03.pdf Sadly you can quickly complicate things, as you're likely to need WS-Reliability if you're going down the notifications road. http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=wsrm I'm not sure what else would be worth poking at, bits like WS-ResourceLifetime might also deserve a look in. Equally, playing with WS-Security and using the SAML callout would let you define whatever you wanted on the security front, and make it open and standardised how you were doing it. These are all boxes of tricks that live independently of GT4 (WSRF.NET for example) but would open up the AG to open and standard interaction with other software. So really my case for this isn't in favour of GT4, it's in favour of standardised (very nearly at least ;) stateful web services. > Did I miss something :-)? I'm sure we've all missed plenty ;) jh -- "The thing I love most about deadlines is the wonderful WHOOSHing sound they make as they go past." -- Douglas Adams.
