I think that is a good one - SERVICE Infrastructure. I used "SOA Infrastructure" in my blog earlier.
http://www.soastudio.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=15 However, I still think that "SOA Implementation" is diffrent from what Anne said "service netwrok". As noted in my blog, SOA implementation includes three elements: - Service orientation (service interface and service implementation) - Service Infrastructure (Where to deploy and manage the services) - SOA Governance (to ensure that SOA principles are met through compliance with enterprise guidelines, standards, and polices) SOA implementation requires a work in these three areas. Regards, Dico_ --- In [email protected], Ron Schmelzer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Bingo! You got it - it's a SERVICE Infrastructure, not a SOA > infrastructure! There's a boat load of difference there between an > infrastructure for implementing Services and an infrastructure for > something that's an abstract concept as architecture, which can have > MULTIPLE implementations. > > Ron > > Anne Thomas Manes wrote: > > When I hear "SOA Implementation" I interpret that to be what I refer > > to as the "service netwrok" -- a deployed set of services built on a > > service infrastructure. (Most people refer to it simply as "a SOA", > > which I really object to -- SOA as a thing.) > > > > Perhaps there I just answered my own question -- perhaps I should > > refer to it as a "service infrastructure" rather than a "SOA > > infrastructure"... > > > > Anne > > > > On 3/17/06, *Ron Schmelzer* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > > > How about SOA Implementation? If we're going to be grandstanding > > and pushing our products on this list (which is a no-no), all I > > can say is that ZapThink has over 400 pieces of research on our > > site, and all of it is popular ;) Check out what we say on this > > topic by reading about the "SOA Implementation Framework" on our site. > > > > > > Ron > > > > Anne Thomas Manes wrote: > > A point of information: > > > > Burton Group (my employer) published a document in January called > > "SOA Infrastructure". It is the most popular document in our > > library. To give you a little context, Burton Group provides > > research by subscription to large enterprise clients (typically > > Fortune 500). We provide four types of subscriptions: identity > > management, security, networking, and application platforms. This > > report was published in the application platforms service, which > > is the smallest of our four services -- about half the size of the > > identity management service. But it's the most popular document > > across all four services. > > > > The statement of problem that this document attempts to answer is: > > > > /What products and technologies should organizations use to > > implement an infrastructure to support service-oriented > > architecture (SOA)?/ > > > > I much prefer this term (SOA infrastructure) to the other term I > > frequently hear: ESB. I just had a dialog with one of my clients > > yesterday, and they used the term ESB to refer to the > > infrastructure they intend to build to support their SOA > > initiative. (They don't think of it as a product.) But I'm not > > willing to use the term ESB because it is too overloaded. > > > > I'm willing to take suggestions for other names to describe this > > infrastructure that supports SOA initiatives... > > > > Anne > > > > On 3/16/06, *Jerry Zhu* <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > > > When we talk about architecture we need to be aware of > > the context. Is it about software application or > > enterprise wide IT planning? Each has different kinds > > of architectures. In software application, for > > example, there should be three kinds of architectures: > > data, software, and system. For enterprise, there > > could be more architectures as defined in FEAF. > > > > Infrastructure could refer to technology architecture > > in EA. It may also refer to application's system > > architecture. When we talk about buildings, there > > maybe only one architecture. Building are things or > > simple systems. Business or a software system is a > > complex system that needs to be viewed in > > multi-perspectives, hence multiple architectures. > > > > Jerry Z. > > > > > > --- Steve Ross-Talbot <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > > > > I think it is wholly unhelpful to mix these terms. > > > Let me explain > > > further. There is a famous building in Paris (the > > > Pompideux centre). It > > > is a building that has an architecture which is > > > something that > > > architects produced. It's infrastructure is visible > > > on the outside of > > > the building - unusual because most are embedded or > > > on the inside. The > > > architecture was the blue print by which the > > > structural engineers and > > > builders delivered what was required. The > > > architecture simply stated > > > that the infrastructure was to be put on the outside > > > and gave a clear > > > description of what that meant. > > > > > > Clearly we do not talk about the architecture > > > infrastructure of the > > > Pompidu Centre being on the outside. We do talk > > > about the > > > infrastructure being on the outside. The danger is > > > that we further > > > promote poor understanding as to what is meant by > > > architecture and we > > > confuse it with infrastructure. Only this week I > > > heard a CEO confuse > > > the two thinking that the infrastructure was the > > > architecture. > > > > > > Whilst I am on the topic I would like to make sure > > > we are all of one > > > mind. Architecture is not something that we do. It > > > is not a verb. It is > > > an artifact that is produced in the course of > > > building a system. > > > According to TOGAF it is "A formal description of a > > > system". According > > > to UML it "the organizational structure of a > > > system". Architecting is > > > something that Architects do and the output of what > > > they do is an > > > Architecture. I suggested at Web Services on Wall > > > Street and I have > > > still to hear anyone counter this - I'd love to have > > > a debate and learn > > > new tricks from those more learned than I - that > > > there is not A in SOA. > > > There is no clear, precise way within the accepted > > > tools sets that can > > > be said to define the SOA space, that are being used > > > or can be used to > > > "formally describe a system" or to describe "the > > > organizational > > > structure of a system". > > > > > > It would be very nice if in this group of interested > > > parties we could > > > actually establish what we mean by architecture and > > > then be clear about > > > how this might differ from the prevailing wisdom of > > > TOGAF, UML, OMG and > > > others. And if it doesn't how one might actually > > > encode an > > > Architecture. Is UML sufficient? Can we describe > > > all of the > > > interactions that occur between a set of services > > > using UML in an > > > unambiguous way? Could we do with BPEL or BPMN? > > > Could we do with > > > WS-CDL? > > > > > > Why should we care? Pretty simple really. When you > > > Architect in the > > > world of civil engineering, electrical engineering > > > and so on, you use a > > > formal description of the system (not all the detail > > > but enough) to > > > simulate and test. This is how Architects find that > > > the stress levels > > > on a specific beam are too high or find that they > > > have over specified > > > some tolerance can reduce the cost of a component. > > > Without such a > > > description this cannot be done. I would content > > > that we should do the > > > same in software. If you cannot write down your > > > Architecture then you > > > do not know enough about what you are doing, and you > > > will have a high > > > risk of failure because of this. > > > > > > I believe we can do better and make the dream of SOA > > > a reality in a > > > lower cost and lower risk way. In effect I think we > > > can put the A back > > > into SOA as opposed to continual talk of SOA when we > > > really only mean > > > Service Orientation - which is a step higher than > > > Object-Orientation. > > > > > > The above rantings are not just the work of a > > > demented long in the > > > tooth perhaps should retire too old software guy. > > > Rather they are an > > > extract of many discussions with many practicing > > > Architects who deliver > > > real systems (not software products) that deliver > > > real business benefit > > > to real customers. > > > > > > Thoughts please ......... > > > > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > > Steve T > > > > > > On 15 Mar 2006, at 13:56, Ron Schmelzer wrote: > > > > > > > So, what exactly is architecture infrastructure? > > > Aren't these two > > > > different things... does it make sense to even > > > combine these two words > > > > together? > > > > > > > > Ron > > > > > > > > Anne Thomas Manes wrote:Gregg, > > > >> > > > >> A SOA infrastructure [sorry JP, but I think this > > > term is useful] > > > >> ought to support any type of communication style: > > > synchronous vs > > > >> asynchronous, request/response vs one-way, direct > > > connection vs > > > >> brokered, queued, pub/sub, Linda, etc. It's even > > > better if the > > > >> infrastructure is natively supported by most > > > development platforms. > > > >> > > > >> I think this last point is the most serious > > > downfall for J/JS. You > > > >> had the luxury of developing your own > > > communication infrastructure, > > > >> and you chose to base it on J/JS. (I think this > > > was a great decision > > > >> for you.) Most organizations don't have that > > > luxury, though. For > > > >> them, software infrastructure development is not > > > a core competency. > > > >> So they buy it. And because a communication > > > infrastructure is such a > > > >> critcal component in their IT systems, they tend > > > to buy it from > > > >> solid, stable vendors -- IBM, Microsoft, BEA, > > > Oracle, SAP, etc. None > > > >> of these vendors provide native support for J/JS > > > (or any Linda system > > > >> for that matter). > > > >> > > > >> I've always been a big fan of Linda, but you > > > must agree that it's a > > > >> fringe technology. It's been around for ever, but > > > never been a part > > > >> of the mainstream. The key advantage I see for > > > using SOAP as the > > > >> foundation for SOA is that *everyone* provides > > > native support for the > > > >> technology. > > > >> > > > >> Anne > > > >> > > > >> On 3/14/06, Gregg Wonderly < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > > Anne Thomas Manes > > > >> wrote: > > > >>> > I understand that the JERI stack opens J/JS > > > up to allow > > > >>> integration with > > > >>> > other languages and protocols, but there are > > > a number of features > > > >>> in J/JS > > > >>> > which are available only to Java > > > applications. > > > >>> > > > >>> There are a number of Web services features > > > that are only available > > > >>> to web > > > >>> services applications. > > > >>> > > > >>> Where is the line drawn to differentiate?I > > > am not sure what > > > >>> missing features > > > >>> you think are problematic or which would cause > > > problems.Can you > > > >>> share some > > > >>> specific concerns?This is really an > > > interesting issue for me. > > > >>> > > > >>> At some point, the technology of choice is > > > visible > > === message truncated === > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > Do You Yahoo!? > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > service-orientated-architecture- [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:service-orientated-architecture- [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________ NOD32 1.1431 (20060305) Information __________ > > > > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. > > http://www.eset.com > > > > > > __________ NOD32 1.1431 (20060305) Information __________ > > > > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. > > http://www.eset.com > > > > -- > > _____________________________________________________________ > > Ronald Schmelzer > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Senior Analyst > > ZapThink LLC > > Direct: 781-577-2779 / Main: 781-207-0203 > > > > > > > > > > SPONSORED LINKS > > Computer software > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads? t=ms&k=Computer+software&w1=Computer+software&w2=Computer+aided+desig n+software&w3=Computer+job&w4=Soa&w5=Service- oriented+architecture&c=5&s=121&.sig=fpXcvMH1T7dIWKArM_WfrQ> > > Computer aided design software > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads? t=ms&k=Computer+aided+design+software&w1=Computer+software&w2=Compute r+aided+design+software&w3=Computer+job&w4=Soa&w5=Service- oriented+architecture&c=5&s=121&.sig=aLmDc98q-ezguJlYUiw3Rw> > > Computer job > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads? t=ms&k=Computer+job&w1=Computer+software&w2=Computer+aided+design+sof tware&w3=Computer+job&w4=Soa&w5=Service- oriented+architecture&c=5&s=121&.sig=S4rCT77z3xUeesYhvuqZ3g> > > > > Soa > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads? t=ms&k=Soa&w1=Computer+software&w2=Computer+aided+design+software&w3= Computer+job&w4=Soa&w5=Service- oriented+architecture&c=5&s=121&.sig=XVYKxWnIx0EdfkBS6DaTLQ> > > Service-oriented architecture > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Service- oriented+architecture&w1=Computer+software&w2=Computer+aided+design+s oftware&w3=Computer+job&w4=Soa&w5=Service- oriented+architecture&c=5&s=121&.sig=i-_f4IMs4JCXEMjxqUGGtA> > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS > > > > # Visit your group "service-orientated-architecture > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated- architecture>" > > on the web. > > > > # To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:service-orientated-architecture- [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > # Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> . > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------- ----------- > > > > > > > > > > SPONSORED LINKS > > Computer software > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads? t=ms&k=Computer+software&w1=Computer+software&w2=Computer+aided+desig n+software&w3=Computer+job&w4=Soa&w5=Service- oriented+architecture&c=5&s=121&.sig=fpXcvMH1T7dIWKArM_WfrQ> > > Computer aided design software > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads? t=ms&k=Computer+aided+design+software&w1=Computer+software&w2=Compute r+aided+design+software&w3=Computer+job&w4=Soa&w5=Service- oriented+architecture&c=5&s=121&.sig=aLmDc98q-ezguJlYUiw3Rw> > > Computer job > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads? t=ms&k=Computer+job&w1=Computer+software&w2=Computer+aided+design+sof tware&w3=Computer+job&w4=Soa&w5=Service- oriented+architecture&c=5&s=121&.sig=S4rCT77z3xUeesYhvuqZ3g> > > > > Soa > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads? t=ms&k=Soa&w1=Computer+software&w2=Computer+aided+design+software&w3= Computer+job&w4=Soa&w5=Service- oriented+architecture&c=5&s=121&.sig=XVYKxWnIx0EdfkBS6DaTLQ> > > Service-oriented architecture > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/gads?t=ms&k=Service- oriented+architecture&w1=Computer+software&w2=Computer+aided+design+s oftware&w3=Computer+job&w4=Soa&w5=Service- oriented+architecture&c=5&s=121&.sig=i-_f4IMs4JCXEMjxqUGGtA> > > > > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------- > > YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS > > > > * Visit your group "service-orientated-architecture > > <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated- architecture>" > > on the web. > > > > * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: > > service-orientated-architecture- [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > <mailto:service-orientated-architecture- [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of > > Service <http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>. > > > > > > ----------------------------------------------------------------- ------- > > > > > > > > __________ NOD32 1.1431 (20060305) Information __________ > > > > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. > > http://www.eset.com > > > > > > __________ NOD32 1.1431 (20060305) Information __________ > > > > This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. > > http://www.eset.com > > -- > _____________________________________________________________ > Ronald Schmelzer > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Senior Analyst > ZapThink LLC > Direct: 781-577-2779 / Main: 781-207-0203 > 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/
