Anne Thomas Manes wrote: > Thanks for the update Jim. > > From what I understand, "Blizzard" won't be a "bundled" > registry/repository. Systinet will continue to sell its registry as a > stand-alone product, and Blizzard will be sold as a separate > repository. Also, Blizzard isn't intended to act as a central > repository for all SOA metadata. Instead it will cache metadata from > their true metadata management sources -- this caching repository will > provide a consolidated view of the environment. I completely agree with Jim's point below, that, if repositories were that irrelevant as suggested by Anne above, then why would Systinet be introducing one in their product suite? The nuanced descriptions above do not diminish the fact that Systinet felt a compelling need to provide a repository for their UDDI registry.
The real question is not "Do we need an integrated registry-repository for SOA governance?" I believe the answer is yes for above. The better questions IMO is "Do we need a *standard-based* integrated registry-repository for SOA governance?" I believe the answer to above is yes as well if the deployment need to interoperate with deployments outside its own "circle of governance" and "circle of trust". > > I stand by my original statement that I recommend a registry-only > solution over a combined registry/repository solution. That doesn't > mean that I don't think repositories are necessary -- they are. But a > registry shouldn't be tied to a single repository, because an SOA > environment will require multiple types of repositories. The ebXML Regitsry standard *does* support working with any "external" content as does UDDI. Many of its advanced features such as content validation, content cataloging, ad hoc discovery queries, classififcationa dand association using user defined taxonomies etc. all work just fine with external content. However, because the ebXML Registry-Repository does not control the external content in any manner there are many things that cannot be done. Here is a partial list: -No access control can be enforced on the content -No lifecycle management controls can be enforced on the content. For example, the registry cannot enforce that "no new references of the content can be made if it is deprecated" -No registry managed versioning of content -Federated content management features ebXML Registry recognizes that the whole worls information content cannot be in the repository of an ebXML Registry and allows its features to work as best as possible for external content. However, it provides additional compelling value if the content *is* stored in its repository. BTW some of the points I have made regarding the importance of integrated, standards -based repository are made in the following article: * UDDI Inadequate for SOA http://www.it-director.com/article.php?articleid=12909 I will post that as a separate thread but the topic is directly connected to the different view points that have been expressed on this thread by myself and by Jim below. > > Anne > > On 9/27/05, *Jim Bole* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> > wrote: > > > Hello everyone, > > In the heated debate between ebXML vs UDDI, several out-of-date > statements were made about X-Registry. To set the record straight: X- > Registry... > > * Does support fine-grained access control using standard UDDI > extension points > > * Can be accessed using any standard UDDI compliant SDK including v2 > and v3 > > * Does support a substantial number of pre-built taxonomies and > validation routines including industry specific taxonomies. > > * Is compliant with UDDI v2 and v3 > > * Is not based on freebXML but a normalized data model which > interoperates fully with UDDI and ebRIM > > > This disconnect is probably because this research is about a year > old--I know the last time Burton group looked at X-Registry was > about 11 months ago. The research is not current in other respects > as well. I don't think Systinet would pre-announce the bundling of a > Repository into their upcoming "Blizzard" platform if they had so > effectively demonstrated: > > "...how well-suited a UDDI compliant registry (without an associated > repository) can be for supporting SOA Governance." > > Thanks, > Jim Bole, > VP of Products, Infravio > > > > > > -- Regards, Farrukh ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Fair play? Video games influencing politics. Click and talk back! http://us.click.yahoo.com/T8sf5C/tzNLAA/TtwFAA/NhFolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
begin:vcard fn:Farrukh Najmi n:Najmi;Farrukh email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] tel;work:781-442-9017 url:http://ebxmlrr.sourceforge.net/tmp/farrukhRacePointIcon.jpg version:2.1 end:vcard
