From: Stuart Charlton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 3:53:14 PM
Subject: Re: [service-orientated-architecture] SOA and ESBs
Anne,
Firstly, to be clear, even though I speak for myself
and not BEA in this discussion, I am interested in
promoting our view of the ESB space. I'm a
consultant, not in product management, so I can't
speak to our future plans. On the other hand, I can
speak to how I see customers adopting the products.
Secondly, comments inline.
--- Anne Thomas Manes <[EMAIL PROTECTED] com> wrote:
> I should have said that most ESBs don't encourage
> good SOA behavior. Not all
> ESBs are created equal. But for the most part, this
> product category focuses
> on servicing tactical integration needs rather than
> enabling good design of
> reusable services.
Fair enough, I agree with this, and am disappointed by
it, as it will only detract from offerings that do
enable good practices.
> It would seem
pretty obvious that ESBs are more
> popular than XML gateways
> (just compare the number of vendors in each
> category), but don't take that
> as proof that ESBs are a better solution.
I don't look at it this way -- i would suggest perhaps
that most don't see or even agree with the distinction
of features that you listed in a prior email, or that
an XML gateway offers more functionality than an ESB.
This is frankly the first time I've heard a suggestion
than an XML gateway, as a product category, offers
more and better functionality!
For example, one of my larger clients refers to their
hardware-based XML gateway as their "enterprise
broker". The major reason they opted for this
approach was price/performance compared to the
available software of the era (2004 timeframe) running
on their chosen infrastructure provider.
In terms of flexibility and quick-reaction to evolving
new interfaces, the
gateway isn't great, and they're
now looking to complement their XML gateway with ALSB
as a neighbourhood proxy to get more flexibility and
quick-reaction times for their delivery teams. So
here is a case where an XML gateway is deemed more
performant but less flexible than an ESB.
My overall point is that it is futile to compare
product categories in this way, given the market's
immaturity and lack of consistent terminology, but I
suppose we will have to leave it at that.
> I'm not aware of any ESB that performs security
> mediation. (vendors --
> correct me if I'm wrong.) BEA's AquaLogic Enterprise
> Security product does
> -- but not ALSB.
This really isn't the case. ALSB most certainly does
do many cases of security mediation (though not as
many as in conjunction with ALES).
It can have TLS inbound and WS-Security outbound, or
vice-versa, I can also actively translate
a
WS-Security authentication request (username/password,
x509, or SAML token) into a new SAML assertion
downstream. It can even take in a SAML-based input
and then use a pre-defined service account for a
downstream service.
In the 2.5 release due in a couple of weeks, there are
even more fine grained capabilities here for identity
mapping to downstream services that don't support SAML
(and not requiring ALES).
> rudimentary monitoring and
> management of services managed by ALSB. But that
> isn't sufficient in a
> heterogeneous environment.
I have clients with very heterogenous environments
(CICS, WebSphere MQ, Tuxedo, FTP batches, HTTP-REST
and HTTP-SOAP etc.) that are starting to use ALSB to
manage, monitor, send alerts, and route/transform
between their services.... I don't see how it's not
sufficient.
> (Otherwise, why would BEA establish partnerships
> with AmberPoint
and SOA Software.)
Obviously a product can't be all things to all
people.... but in my opinion the main reason for these
partnerships is that ALSB isn't a agent-based WSM
solution, which might be more appropriate in some
contexts.
> The management and security capabilities supplied by
> XML gateways and SOA
> management products are far superior to those
> supplied by an ESB.
I disagree on this, it doesn't fit with my experience
in the field when working with our products and
talking to our customers and prospects. There
certainly are many that are interested in WSM
solutions, but it's usually as a complement, not a
superior replacement.
> all these capabilities. And this infrastructure
> should not be hosted on a
> single instance of an app server (my primary
> objection to ALSB).
Granted, federated management is an issue with the ESB
model, though we're working on
that.
> I stand by my recommendations.
I just wanted to clarify whether I understood your
position correctly, and to note that not all ESBs are
created equal.
Cheers
Stu
____________ _________ _________ _________ _________ __
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail. yahoo.com
| 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.
