Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: Mercury to buy Systinet

Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:41:10 -0800

"...Infravio reported a record quarter in Q4."
 
Isn't Infravio still privately held?
 
M. R. Pamidi
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Mukund Balasubramanian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wed, 11 Jan 2006 11:25:58 -0800
Subject: RE: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: Mercury to buy Systinet

The article was pretty well written in my opinion as well.
 
Re: UDDI registry space and the reusable asset management space
 
I believe there is significant overlap in terms of technology even though I perceive a larger divergence when it comes to history and use cases.
 
Re: What does this mean for SOA infrastructure? 
 
Hopefully you classify Infravio as one of the startups with innovative products J But from our experience in the market there is significant momentum in the registry/repository/governance space. Evidence of that was the fact that Infravio reported a record quarter in Q4.
 
I also believe the broader use cases around governance and policy management are beginning to congeal (much later than I hoped or expected but it _is_ happening) and the technologies created by the startups have matured to address the needs of enterprises with sufficient ROI.
 
Again, I speak with an obvious bias but I don?t believe Systinet being taken out is an indication of the lack of sustainability of the marketplace but more the latter case you had mentioned which is that the revenues generated by the market are significant enough for the larger vendors to take notice.
 
Mukund Balasubramanian
CTO/Infravio Inc.
 
From: Todd Biske [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 10, 2006 8:45 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: Mercury to buy Systinet
 
I enjoyed CBR's article on this.  One interesting thing in the article was this:
 
"Not surprisingly, when news of the deal went out over the wires, Systinet rivals like Flashline trash talked the deal, saying that Mercury's entry would drive the loss of some of GIF partners."
 
This is the first time I've seen anyone claim that Flashline was a competitor to Systinet.  Personally, I've been tracking the convergence between the UDDI registry space and the reusable asset management space for some time, and it's nice to see others making note of the same thing.
 
On a different, but related note, as a consumer of SOA technology, this acquisition raises some concerns.  It seems that nearly all of the startups with innovative products are gone.  What does this mean for SOA infrastructure?  While acquisitions are a normal part of the emerging technology industry, it seems that none of niche vendors are finding large enough demand to sustain a company, and their only hope for survival is to have their efforts subsidized by a larger player, which inevitably means the product will only be available as part of a larger bundle.  This is a good thing when the industry has come to an agreement on the capabilities, but I don't think we're anywhere near that point in the registry/repository/governance space, just as with the ESB/Mediation/Brokering space.  While Mercury is by no means Oracle or IBM, it makes me wonder... is there just not enough demand for this technology, or is the demand ramping up causing vendors to make moves in order to be better positioned?  I hope it's the latter.  The amount of press being given to the registry/repository space has been growing, so I would be very surprised if this wasn't the case.
 
-tb
 
 
On Jan 10, 2006, at 6:46 AM, Gervas Douglas wrote:


Here is some comment from CBR on this:
 
<<So Mercury has staked claim to the development of software and
tracking whether the software delivers what is promised.
 
It is deliberately ambiguous as to whether that means run time.
Mercury has designed its governance tools to deal with the here and
now so dashboards could indicate when promises such as service levels
might be broken.
 
But where the rubber meets the road, actually instrumenting what
happens on servers and networks remains the domain of the systems
management frameworks, not Mercury's Business Technology Optimization
(BTO) centers.
 
As to Systinet, when we asked CEO Thomas Erickson how clients were
using its registries, runtime discovery ranked far down as third of
four use cases. When he describes current R&D, he focuses on idea like
contract management with service consumers, a function that doesn't
exactly sound like runtime discovery.
 
To recap, UDDI was one of three core building block standards created
for web services. As we noted last year (see Computergram, April 18
and 22, 2005), UDDI was the slowest of the three to attain adoption.
 
In large part, it was due to the fact that you needed the first two
SOAP (the protocol for making services requests) and WSDL (the
protocol for declaring, or describing the service being offered)
before it made any sense to use registries. Furthermore, you only
needed registries when you accumulated multiple services to track and
manage.
 
But the notion of service requests discovering services on the fly has
not been a popular one for several reasons. First, runtime discovery
only makes sense if there are multiple services, or versions of
services to choose from. In most cases, organizations are only now
just starting to ramp up the number of services that they offer.
 
Another concern is governance or compliance. Theoretically, if you
enforce policies properly, you shouldn't have to worry about letting
requests spontaneously discover services, because policies will be
automatically enforced.
 
But the art or science of policy management in web services and
services-oriented architectures is still sufficiently immature to give
compliance officers the willys at the notion of introducing any sort
of unpredictability.
 
In our earlier reports on UDDI, we noted that Systinet and rival
Infravio were battling for hearts and minds, not with who could devise
the better run time capability, but with thought leadership over
service planning and governance.>>
 
You can find this at:
 
 
Gervas
 
--- In [email protected], William Henry
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 
Wow. I heard this earlier today. Is this good omen or bad omen for  
registries and UDDI??? Strange timing.
 
(And will this group be now sponsored by Mercury? ;-)
 
Congratulations Systinet!
 
William
 
On Jan 9, 2006, at 10:56 AM, Paul Brown wrote:
 
Interesting news just out
type=mergersNews&sto
ryID=URI:urn:newsml:reuters.com: 
20060109:MTFH38309_2006-01-09_13-41-54_WEN73
94:1) is that Mercury is to buy Systinet. Still digesting the  
implications
of this, but my first reaction is !
 
The announced price ($105M) is interesting as well, since it's a
roughly 4x multiple over the total capital (27.5M, if memory serves)
that Systinet has raised in the past.
 
-- Paul
 
 
 
 
 
 
Yahoo! Groups Links
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Yahoo! Groups Links
 
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
 
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
 
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
 
 
 
 


SPONSORED LINKS
Service-oriented architecture Computer monitoring software Free computer monitoring software

YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS




YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS



Reply via email to