Ws-Why?
Original title was WS-Islands
Was also going to talk about oxid resolver to epr nuts and bolts. But nobody cares :)
1. WS-DesertIsland
"To get the steaming turd hidden, you really need a graphic artist."
2. xml or lisp - either one would be fine
"Tim [Bray] why didn't you use lisp [instead of inventing something new]?"
"Uh, uh, uh, uh..."
"The data outlives the code"
"Sometimes we make architectural mistakes at Microsoft. I'm sure others do, too"
3. soap
Pretty ambitious goals
SOAP 1.2 Part 1 is a pretty reasonable place
Some sort of extensibility mechanism other than "Throw shit anywhere you want"
Best? I don't know.
Workable. I think so.
The entire [upcoming] .net serializer is logically soap-based.
fairly minor wrapper around XML, a bit of a constrained version of XML.
Soap 1.1 Section five is ... a Linda Blair experience.
Scoped out DTD, because we wanted the base message model.
4. ws-addressing
We tried to put as little policy in soap as possible.
If we could have put any more in SOAP,... the stuff we would have put in is the stuff is ws-addressing.
two things in wsa were controversial
Moderately controversial - we put in an action uri
action was not strictly speaking about addressing
More controversial - endpoint reference
thou shalt name everything with a uri
"We expect that most indigo services will be named with simple uris"
If I want to pickle up goop that is a byproduct of our conversation, I have two choices
- query strings - doesn't compose with our everything is xml
(commentary: why not leave the session information as part of the application protocol)
MPRDV(AGITAWU) - And get ibm to agree with us
There are a lot of poeple at MS and IBM that love complexity -- Don has weeded most of them out of Indigo :)
Don't put commentary in the specifications (e.g. expected usage)
All we are going to agree about is what goes out on the wire
ws-mex
"Single most important architectural specification that we forgot"
Taking us until 2007 to fix it.
"The first app protocol I would have taken with me."
"Turns out to be super important."
xsdwsdl
"The next thing I would take, BEGRUDGINGLY, is xsdwsdl (not separating in dbox's mind)" Both suck.
I would love for the world to go to Relax NG
It would also be great if the Amiga won.
I don't see the industry jumping on to RNG.
These specs + HTTP and I would be done.
WS-IslandResort
If however, we get to pick what island we live on, I would go to the island that has the following palm trees:
ws-security
- it is necessary
- can't rely on transport security
being able to have a cryptographically secure, embedded way of doing that is probably better than doing it yourself
If I don't need [message/data security], SSL is probably good enough. For workflow-y types of applications, it turns out to be very important.
WS-Security leverages xml dsig and xml encryption, both of which cause performance issues.
"Omri!"
"Does it make the system go faster or slower to use ws-security?"
No
How bad.
A factor of 10.
Does it make it 10x secure?
No.
only makes sense if the stacks retain the canonical data, e.g. if there are anys that are signed against, need to keep them there.
ws-trust
gives a way to bootstrap ws-security tokens
ws-secureconversation
public keys are expensive, session keys aren't so.
ws-reliablemessaging
if you are happy with transport reliability - ignore this spec.
unless you are going through intermediaries or relays or queues, and you have the potential to reorder, etc.
does not give you queuing, durability. Just end-to-end reliable messaging.
ws-policy
The name of the wsdl porttype does not appear on the wire -- by design.
It is possible that your wsdl porttype does not match mine, but they may be a non-empty intersection of messages that you and I can send and receive
first ws-policy is way overly complicated
WS-NewZealand
"A lovely place that everyone should visit ONCE in their lifetime."
ws-eventing
strictly speaking, we don't need it
there is a strong desire to
It is a minimum that we can do [to get IBM on board.]
ws-atomictx
"There are three people
MS-DTC, CICS and WebSphere, Tuxedo
ws-enumeration
ws-islandofdrmoreau
uddi - just disturbing
uddi is better engineered
"Anytime you see business embedded in the technology, I think something is wrong."
mtom - shouldn't have needed it
ws-transfer
- wanted to see whether RESTafarians were addicted to HTTP or Roy Fielding
relax ng for schema, retire ng for behavioral (e.g. wsdl)
Posted by: Yan | 2006.05.25 at 06:43 AM