Jerry, That depends on which product you buy.
I prefer to differentiate registries from repositories, although many vendors combine the two into a single product. A registry's primary role is to enable information exchange among the diverse set of systems used to manage communications and message flow at runtime (e.g., platforms, ESBs, XML gateways, management agents, mediation systems, etc). Given that an orgainzation will almost certainly use multiple systems to implement a services infrastructure, it's essential that these systems have a standard means to exchange information related to metadata, policies, access points, routing rules, performance, incidents, SLAs, etc. A UDDI-compliant registry with it's standard data model and protocol provides the means to enable this information exchange. Note that a registry acts as an index to information. The only information maintained in a registry is properties (using a name/value pair system called a keyedReference), short description fields, and pointers to more information. More comprehensive information, such as schemas, WSDLs, BPEL scripts, documentation, code, etc, should be maintained in a separate repository. Most registry products implement the UDDI specification, which defines both a data model (via XML Schema) and a protocol (via WSDL and SOAP APIs) for interfacing with the registry. I view full support for the UDDI v3 specification, including optional features, such as the subscription and value set APIs, as a required feature for a registry. Registries that fully implement UDDI v3 include HP Systinet, webMethods Infravio, SOA Software Workbench, and Software AG CentraSite. BEA, Oracle, and Tibco resell/OEM the Systinet registry as BEA AquaLogic Service Registry, Oracle Registry (included with Oracle AS, Oracle ESB, and Oracle SOA Suite), and Tibco Matrix (which is a package containing Systinet Registry and AmberPoint WSM). Registries/repositories that do not fully implement the UDDI v3 spec include IBM's UDDI implementation (included with WAS v6 -- it supports the required features of UDDI v3, but not the optional features), IBM WebSphere Registry and Repository (WSRR - it does not support UDDI), Sun's registry/repository (part of JES -- it supports the UDDI v3 inquiry API only), BEA Repository (formerly Flashline -- it supports the UDDI v3 inquiry API only), LogicLibrary (it does not support UDDI), Microsoft Enterprise UDDI Services (included with Windows Server 2003 -- it supports UDDI v2), and Apache jUDDI (it supports UDDI v2). A growing number of registry products also provide repository features, and some products are stand-alone repositories (not really registries) -- although the exact set of repository features varies significantly among the products. Most registry/repository products provide content management and maybe version control of various XML artifacts (e.g., WSDL, XML Schema, XSLT, etc). Some repositories also support a number of governance capabilities. Some provide lifecycle management of these artifacts with built-in processes to manage transitions between lifecycle stages. Some provide automatic discovery and management of relationships and dependencies among artifacts. Some provide extensive reporting facilities that support impact analysis, metrics management, and more. Some provide the means to define policies, group policies, associate policies with artifacts, and automatically test artifacts for compliance with policies (on-demand or during lifecycle transitions). Some provide the means to define and manage contracts between service consumers and service providers. Given the kind of information you might want to capture in a repository, you probably don't want to constrain the data model to the one defined by UDDI. And open content model makes the repository much more extensible and valuable. HP Systinet, IBM WSRR, BEA Repository (i.e., Flashline), and LogicLibrary support an extensible, open content model. All four systems support a variety of content management and governance features, but only HP Systinet also fully supports UDDI. (HP Systinet maintains two separate but synchronized data stores -- a UDDI v3 compliant registry and a separate repository with an open content model). Infravio, SOA Software, and Software AG provide combined registry/repository products which extend the UDDI data model to also support content management and various other capabilities. The Infravio product offers more governance features than the others. The data models do not offer the kind of flexibility available with HP, IBM, BEA, and Logic Library. Anne On 2/7/07, Jerry Zhu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Anne, Thanks for the info. You said that UDDI is a protocol talking to registry. You mentioned three things: registry, repository, and protocol talking to registry. If I implement SOA, do I need to buy all three things from three vendors? Thanks Jerry --- Anne Thomas Manes <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <atmanes%40gmail.com>> wrote: > Note that the report I wrote is not just about UDDI > -- it's about registry, > repository, and governance. UDDI is just one small > aspect of the greater set > of governance systems. But as this interview > indicates, I view support for > the UDDI protocol as an essential requirement (but > not the only requirement) > for a runtime registry. > > Anne > > On 2/6/07, Gervas Douglas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]<gervas.douglas%40gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > *The original definition of Web services > included SOAP, WSDL and UDDI, > > but the latter was often ignored, until now, as a > Burton Group report says > > UDDI v3.0 is emerging as a key standard for SOA > registry and repository > > technology.* > > > > *The importance of the UDDI standard in the future > of SOA is highlighted > > in a new Burton Group Inc. report, "Registry > Services: The Foundation for > > SOA Governance" by Anne Thomas Manes, research > director at the analyst firm. > > In this interview, Manes explains why after being > ignored for so long, the > > OASIS UDDI standard now at version 3.0, is finally > moving up the adoption > > curve.* > > > > * * > > > > > > > > *The original definition of Web services was > that it was SOAP, WSDL and > > UDDI, but nobody ever seemed to include UDDI. Why > has UDDI lagged in > > adoption for Web services and SOA?* > > Anne Thomas Manes: That's because UDDI was part of > the management space. > > You never need management right at the start. At > the beginning you need the > > development tools. That's the core. SOAP and WSDL > gave you the core > > development tools to go out and build Web > services. You don't have to do > > management until you have systems that are running > in production. That's why > > UDDI is slowly, but surely gaining traction. I > think it's a lot more > > accepted now than it was a year ago. > > > > *Do you see drivers now that might speed the > adoption of UDDI for SOA > > implementations?* > > Manes: Staring in 2004 the innovators were > adopting UDDI. In 2005, it was > > the early adopters. And in 2007, we might cross > the divide and get to the > > early majority. > > > > *Is that because UDDI has become necessary for > SOA?* > > Manes: I think so. You don't need UDDI to get > started with Web services. > > You don't need UDDI to enable integration among > applications. But if you > > want to do SOA, you have to start managing the > environment and UDDI becomes > > the system that enables communication among > multiple environments. UDDI is > > the foundation for governance. As people start > deploying more and more > > services and their systems get further and further > out of control, they > > realize that they need to do something. And they > start by bringing in a > > registry. > > > > *So is the need for a registry driving UDDI > adoption?* > > Manes: Usually, they figure out pretty soon that a > registry is not enough > > and then they have to bring in a repository and > start contract management > > and policy management, but it's really only the > innovators who have reached > > the true understanding of the meaning of > governance. > > > > *Why is UDDI important to the registry in SOA > implementations?* > > Manes: The true value of UDDI is not for discovery > of services. It's not > > like a developer uses UDDI to figure out where a > service is. The purpose of > > UDDI is for the various components of your runtime > infrastructure to be able > > to share information about services and > dependencies and policies that apply > > to the services that are out there. So the value > of UDDI is that it's a > > standard protocol to talk to a registry. The > registry provides this > > information exchange. If I don't know how to talk > to the registry, I can't > > get that information. So the protocol to talk to > the registry is UDDI. It's > > a critical component of the system. > > > > *Are there any competing technologies?* > > Manes: Well IBM has created a whole new API. It's > called IBM WebSphere > > Registry and Repository and it's been shipping for > about six months. So it's > > possible that IBM is going to turn around and say, > "We've created a whole > > new format and everybody else should adopt our > approach." Is everybody in > > the world is going to jump on the bandwagon and do > it the way IBM says? I > > don't know about that. > > > > > > > > *Now, isn't there an issue as to whether to use > UDDI or ebXML?* > > Manes: I don't think there's an issue at all. > There's a spec out there > > called ebXML Registry, but nobody's using it. > > > > *What do you see as UDDI's strength as a standard, > versus other proposals > > such as ebXML Registry or IBM's WebSphere Registry > and Repository?* > > Manes: The problem is this: if I use AmberPoint > for management, and I have > > Sonic ESB, and I have the Reactivity XML Gateway, > and I'm still building > > services with WebSphere and .NET and Ruby on > Rails, how do all those systems > > communicate with IBM's registry? It doesn't work. > If I throw in the Systinet > > registry or the Infravio registry they all know > how to talk to UDDI. They > > can all share the information. > > > > *So will this be the year we see some real forward > movement for UDDI?* > > Manes: Certainly, I've seen steady increase in > interest in UDDI over the > > last two to three years. It's slowly gaining > adoption. > > > > You can read this interview at: > > > > > > > http://searchwebservices.techtarget.com/regActivateSiteMO/1,296514,sid26,00.html?NextURL=http%3A%2F%2Fsearchwebservices%2Etechtarget%2Ecom%2ForiginalContent%2F0%2C289142%2Csid26%5Fgci1230185%2C00%2Ehtml%3FOffer%3DWSintesb1211&priTopic=299051 > > > > Gervas > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________________ It's here! Your new message! Get new email alerts with the free Yahoo! Toolbar. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/toolbar/features/mail/
