> 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.

OK, I think I am reading a suggestion that an ESB is essentially
something that can integrate the flow of information across multiple
transfer mechanisms, some of which use standard protocols, some of
which use language-specific APIs, some may be more proprietary than
that. I can go with that, with the addition that there is some
development and runtime management as well.

-Patrick








SPONSORED LINKS
Computer software Computer aided design software Computer job
Soa Service-oriented architecture


YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS




Reply via email to