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

RE: FW: Reliable Messaging Summary

From: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler) <RogerCutler@ChevronTexaco.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2003 07:26:38 -0600
Message-ID: <7FCB5A9F010AAE419A79A54B44F3718E01624B3F@bocnte2k3.boc.chevrontexaco.net>
To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>
cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org

This looks to me like a good definition within the context of looking at
architecture, but in the context of RM it doesn't look entirely
appropriate to me.  In the same sense that some of the definitions of
synchronous floating around look perfectly fine to me, but not
appropriate for our particular context.

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Baker [mailto:distobj@acm.org] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 11:55 AM
To: Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)
Cc: www-ws-arch@w3.org
Subject: Re: FW: Reliable Messaging Summary

On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 09:50:53AM -0600, Cutler, Roger (RogerCutler)
> > Reliability:  A predictable quality of service. This is a separate 
> > issue from fault tolerance, availability, or security.

I'd like to recommend Roy Fielding's definition.  It's more broad than
what's been suggested so far, but it seems bang on from my POV;

"Reliability, within the perspective of application architectures, can
be viewed as the degree to which an architecture is susceptible to
failure at the system level in the presence of partial failures within
components, connectors, or data. Styles can improve reliability by
avoiding single points of failure, enabling redundancy, allowing
monitoring, or reducing the scope of failure to a recoverable action."

Mark Baker.   Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.        http://www.markbaker.ca
Web architecture consulting, technical reports, evaluation & analysis
Received on Wednesday, 5 March 2003 08:26:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:41:05 UTC