W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-ws-arch@w3.org > December 2003

RE: Intermediaries

From: Ugo Corda <UCorda@SeeBeyond.com>
Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2003 16:45:48 -0800
Message-ID: <EDDE2977F3D216428E903370E3EBDDC9032B89CF@MAIL01.stc.com>
To: "Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)" <RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com>, "Champion, Mike" <Mike.Champion@SoftwareAG-USA.com>, <www-ws-arch@w3.org>

What could be harvested was already put in our definition of gateway in the Glossary. To be honest, I never completely subscribed to that definition, but I have no plan to reopen the issue now.

If you look at the thread I mentioned, you'll see that many of the discussions are pretty similar to what we have been discussing now, a year later. So I suspect that some areas are going to stay unclear for a little longer ...

Ugo

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) 
> [mailto:RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 4:36 PM
> To: Ugo Corda; Champion, Mike; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Intermediaries
> 
> 
> Well, maybe it would be useful to summarize -- or perhaps harvest
> something from these threads (and threadlets) you are talking about.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org] On
> Behalf Of Ugo Corda
> Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 3:59 PM
> To: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler); Champion, Mike; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> Subject: RE: Intermediaries
> 
> 
> 
> Let's not forget we already had a long thread about gateways 
> last year.
> See the thread "Gateways" at
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-arch/2002Oct/thread.html.
> 
> Ugo
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org]On
> > Behalf Of Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)
> > Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 1:52 PM
> > To: Champion, Mike; www-ws-arch@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Intermediaries
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Where do gateways fit into this?  Beyond the scope of 
> intermediaries? 
> > If so, what is the distinction that puts them outside the scope.
> > 
> > By "gateway" I have in mind, for example, a company that
> > provides, as a
> > service, the collecting of purchase requests from client 
> companies and
> > the sending of the required purchase request to vendors, 
> > handling  along
> > the way security, tracking, and so on.
> > 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: www-ws-arch-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:www-ws-arch-request@w3.org] On
> > Behalf Of Champion, Mike
> > Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 3:10 PM
> > To: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> > Subject: RE: Intermediaries
> > 
> > 
> > 
> >  
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) 
> > > [mailto:RogerCutler@chevrontexaco.com]
> > > Sent: Friday, December 05, 2003 3:37 PM
> > > To: Ugo Corda; Francis McCabe
> > > Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
> > > Subject: RE: Intermediaries
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Yes -- is it possible that the issues that you are trying 
> to raise 
> > > with respect to intermediaries are beyond a reasonable 
> scope for the
> 
> > > present effort, given the practical limitations of time and 
> > > personnel?
> > 
> > I for one am becoming less and less convinced that the idea of 
> > "application defined equivalence" to distinguish 
> intermediaries from 
> > "regular" web services is productive.
> > 
> > I think it would be desireable to identify the various 
> senses in which
> 
> > "intermediaries" is used in the web services context. As 
> far as I can 
> > tell, the only thing that distinguishes any kind of intermediary is 
> > that it is both a message receiver and a message sender.  
> We have at 
> > least the
> > following:
> > 
> > "Underlying protocol" [I fear to say "transport"] 
> intermediaries that 
> > help move bits around efficiently, e.g. TCP/IP routers, 
> HTTP proxies 
> > and caches.
> > 
> > "message intermediaries" that perform some MOM-level 
> service such as 
> > gateways between HTTP and MQ, routers that send a message to the 
> > geographically appropriate destination,  or perhaps those 
> that handle 
> > a protocol such as WS-ReliableMessaging.  These make sure that SOAP
> > messages (as opposed to bits) are delivered to the correct ultimate
> > receiver node.
> > 
> > "service intermediaries" provide higher-level services such 
> as policy 
> > enforcement.  WS-Security aware Firewalls are an obvious 
> example, as 
> > would be the SOAP Primer example of an intermediary that quietly 
> > changes business class reservation requests to coach class if an
> > application-level policy requires it.  
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 5 December 2003 19:47:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 3 July 2007 12:25:24 GMT