Let me correct myself and say "transfer" protocol instead of transport. Utimately, they're a way of moving bits with various differences in reliability, performance, available message exchange patterns, schemes to describe resources.
My point is that an ESB should be independent of transfer protocol. It looks at transfer protocols in a modular way and can make it quite easy for a user to mediate between MQSeries inbound and HTTP POST outbound, or SMTP inbound and MQSeries outbound, adapting between varying message exchange patterns, levels of reliability, credential declarations, etc.
Stu
----- Original Message ----
From: patrickdlogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, May 6, 2006 10:39:39 PM
Subject: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: MQSeries vs. ESB
> In this case MQSeries is just a transport...
Isn't MQSeries more than that? i.e. MQSeries moves things from here to
there, but in various ways, asynchronously, with queue-based
semantics, etc. That seems to be much more than "just a transport".
> As is HTTP, FTP, SMTP, etc.
And so aren't these more like MQSeries than they are like "any other
transport"? i.e. they move things from here to there, but in various
ways, with certain rules and expectations about sequence,
sychronicity, identification, etc.
> I found this view drastically simplifies a lot of the confusion
> around an ESB's role in an SOA...
It seems like an oversimplification to me.
-Patrick
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
My point is that an ESB should be independent of transfer protocol. It looks at transfer protocols in a modular way and can make it quite easy for a user to mediate between MQSeries inbound and HTTP POST outbound, or SMTP inbound and MQSeries outbound, adapting between varying message exchange patterns, levels of reliability, credential declarations, etc.
Stu
----- Original Message ----
From: patrickdlogan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, May 6, 2006 10:39:39 PM
Subject: [service-orientated-architecture] Re: MQSeries vs. ESB
> In this case MQSeries is just a transport...
Isn't MQSeries more than that? i.e. MQSeries moves things from here to
there, but in various ways, asynchronously, with queue-based
semantics, etc. That seems to be much more than "just a transport".
> As is HTTP, FTP, SMTP, etc.
And so aren't these more like MQSeries than they are like "any other
transport"? i.e. they move things from here to there, but in various
ways, with certain rules and expectations about sequence,
sychronicity, identification, etc.
> I found this view drastically simplifies a lot of the confusion
> around an ESB's role in an SOA...
It seems like an oversimplification to me.
-Patrick
SPONSORED LINKS
| Computer software | Computer aided design software | Computer job |
| Soa | Service-oriented architecture |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "service-orientated-architecture" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
SPONSORED LINKS
| Computer software | Computer aided design software | Computer job |
| Soa | Service-oriented architecture |
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
- Visit your group "service-orientated-architecture" on the web.
- To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
