Re: Proposed text on reliability in the web services architecture

Assaf Arkin wrote,
> Miles Sabin wrote,
> > Well, ultimately RM is only interesting insofar as it supports
> > overall reliable operation.
>
> But who defines and exposes that operation in your example?

I don't think there's a clear cut answer to that question. Suppose we 
have two "legacy" endpoints communicating via WS adapters. The 
endpoints don't know anything about WS (that's why they're legacy 
rather than services in their own right) so they can't define or expose 
anything in any sense which is relevant to the WS arch doc (ie. they 
aren't responsible for exposing WSDL, or SOAP messaging or WS RM or 
whatever). That can only be done by the WS adapters. But equally the 
adapters don't know everything of relevance to the application (that's 
why they're adapters rather than applications in their own right).

So there's a gap between the parties which are making the visible 
commitments (the WS adapters) and the parties which are ultimately 
responsible for meeting them (the endpoints). Whether that gap is 
narrow and/or easily bridged, or an all consuming abyss is likely to 
vary on a case-by-case basis. I'm sure many of us on this list have 
experienced both.

Cheers,


Miles

Received on Tuesday, 21 January 2003 16:57:58 UTC