Anne,
I have not considered using AtomPub or RSS. Thanks for the pointer. I definitely will look into these choices. We have made the decision of using JBI. This decision may eliminates some of the registeries you mention. Another option I am considering is WSRF Henryk Anne Thomas Manes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Have you considered using AtomPub or RSS as a means to propagate service information? Three registry/repository products support AtomPub and RSS: - Mule Galaxy (open source) - WSO2 Registry (open source) - HP SOA Systinet Anne On Jan 28, 2008 11:00 AM, henryk mozman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Steve, > > The requirements constraint for the architecture which I am helping to > design cannot have a single directory for discovery. > > Henryk > > > > Steve Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > One semi-interesting question here is when SOA isn't peer-to-peer. Each > service (whether via REST, WS, Jini, etc) can be discovered dynamically, > hot-deployed and have its actual end-point changed. These services can > communicate directly with others without any need for a complex > infrastructure or central point and they can communicate between different > networks. > > Now some of that is theory (e.g. dynamic discovery) but lots of it is > relatively standard for enterprise scale SOA deployments where you have a > series of semi-disconnected entities communicating directly, often as a > result (like most p2p solutions) of some form of directory. > > Steve > > > On 28/01/2008, henryk mozman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Jeff, > > > > In reality, I am more interested in implementing a peer-to-peer SOA than > JXTA. > > JXTA may be one way to implement SOA. I suspect that there are many other > ways, to implement p2p SOA. I was interested in hearing from any one who has > been there and done that. > > > > Henryk > > > > > > jeffrschneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > When you say "SOA with JXTA", I'm assuming that you mean "SOAP over > > JXTA", as in: https://soap.dev.java.net/ > > > > It's been years since I've done this but the general result was less > > than what I'd hoped for. In some ways, JXTA is designed for the worse > > case scenario. That is, it is more about resilience than high > > throughput or low latency. Generally speaking, resilience isn't the > > primary non-functional requirement in business systems. JXTA assumes > > that you might have firewalls, NAT's and other ugly stuff in your > > network and is designed to traverse the obstacle, at the expense of > > speed and latency. > > > > It has been my experience that architects prefer to use alternative > > mechanisms to increase reliability and availability. I don't want to > > discourage anyone from going down this path, just encourage you to > > force-rank your non-functional requirements. > > > > Here's an article I wrote 7 years ago on the subject :-) > > http://www.openp2p.com/pub/a/p2p/2001/07/20/convergence.html > > > > Jeff Schneider > > > > --- In [email protected], henryk mozman > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Has anyone in this group any experience in implementing SOA with the > > peer-to-peer > > > JXTA ? > > > > > > I would be interested in reading about your experience > > > > > > > > > Henryk > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
