[jbossws-dev] Re: Web Service Stack for EAP 5

[Mark Little]

On 18 Mar 2008, at 19:04, Burr Sutter wrote:

>>
>>
>> http://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBWS?report=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.project:roadmap-panel
> Excellent news.  Thank you.  It was unclear to me which version of  
> JBossWS had WS-RM support and which one would make it into AS5/ 
> EAP5.  This is worthy of some marketing attention in either a future  
> ESB or AS release. It looks like docs are here: http://jbws.dyndns.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=WS_Reliable_Messaging

We need to make sure that it is compliant and interoperable before we  
go marketing it. That's what Web Services is all about these days.

>
> Let me ask the stupid marketing guy question:  Is there anything in  
> WS-RM that works like a JMS topic? Something where I can "broadcast"  
> or "push" out a message to N receivers (e.g. VB WinForm app) who  
> have a background thread waiting on this event?  Or is that more  
> what WS-Eventing and WS-Notification are for?  I ask this question  
> because this specific use case has been requested before.  Mostly in  
> the context of ESB. ServiceMix seems to achieve this via WS- 
> Notification.

That's not WS-RM or WS-RX. WS-Notification, WS-Eventing or WS- 
EventManagement (the one to come from the merge) is what you need.

>>
>> We try to unlock these from jbossws-metro
> I assume having Metro integrated with AS/EAP to support these  
> features is much easier than trying to recreate them in our own  
> native codebase.   It is the public's perception of the work done  
> with Metro & CXF via JBossWS that we'll get some of these more  
> "advanced" WS-* checkboxes/tick marks much more easily than trying  
> to build them wholly on our own.  This has come up in a few  
> different sales situations recently.

It's not a zero effort approach though. CXF does not do anything with  
interoperability at the moment. Metro is based on older specifications  
and standards that even Microsoft is moving away from. The intention  
is that we will get involved in one or both of these communities to  
help drive them in the areas that they are deficient. As a result  
we'll pick up more than we could do by ourselves.

>
>>
>>> - No non-HTTP transports
>>
>> We have jms transport
> I've just noticed we added some JAX-WS docs around this capability at
> http://jbws.dyndns.org/mediawiki/index.php?title=JAX-WS_User_Guide#JMS_Transport_Clients 
> .  Before it was only documented as a JAX-RPC feature hence the  
> belief that it didn't exist in the JAX-WS world (from a presales  
> perspective).  I should sit down and re-read everything in the  
> JBossWS wiki and work with the sales team to get this updated. :-)

Is this based on the W3C specification for SOAP/JMS :-)?

>>
>> We attend the .NET interop workshops, just like Metro does. There  
>> we test the functionality we have available
>>
>> Heiko, is taking care of
>> http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=131839
> Sun likes to talk about their relationship with Microsoft, engineers  
> working together between the 2 organizations, testsuites that prove  
> interoperability and as .NET updates occur, making sure  
> interoperability is still achieved.  It is tough in a sales  
> situation to suggest that we can do what Metro/WSIT have done as  
> relates to interop with .NET on the various WS-* stuff.   Note, I've  
> not reviewed Metro's docs on this matter, nor seen any example code  
> that shows me the C#/VB.NET

It does work. But like I said above: they use the older versions of  
the specifications and standards (sometimes as old as 4 or 5 years).

>>>
>>
>> WSDL-2.0 is practically irrelevant AFAICT
> Good point.  Customers do ask but if .NET can't consume it or  
> produce it then it is irrelevant.  Does anyone know if .NET supports  
> it?

Both IBM and MSFT will support WSDL 2.0. They don't have a choice. But  
its take-up elsewhere will continue to be very patchy. WSDL 1.1 and  
WSDL 2.0 are getting a lot of negative press, for very good reasons too.

>
>>
>>>
>>> From my "marketing" perspective, that is a lot of NOs at this  
>>> point in the overall game.  BEA, Oracle & IBM are "hurting" us in  
>>> this area.  Luckily our customers haven't widely adopted WS-*  
>>> overall but if we wish to be taken seriously in the SOA space,  
>>> we'll need to at least keep up with the other open source engines  
>>> (Glassfish, Geronimo, Mule, ServiceMix).
>>
>> With the current resource situation we can allocate 25% (i.e. one  
>> guy to metro/cxf integration)
> Based on this comment and Mark's previous one suggesting 10 more  
> people be found, it sounds like in order to make CXF or Metro a  
> "first class citizens" and fully supported on EAP and/or SOA-P we  
> would need to ramp up dramatically on the JBossWS team, at least  
> temporarily.   In your estimation, is it really 10 new senior  
> developers for 10 more months to get ourselves as a committer to  
> Metro or CXF and to make it "feel" like a native component of EAP/ 
> SOA-P and have it fully supported for customers? Assuming 100% WS-*   
> and interop capabilities are inherited by us via this effort?
>>

This was 10 people if you wanted it all done this year ;-) Thomas and  
I are discussing this now as well.

Mark.

----
Mark Little
mlittle at redhat.com

JBoss, a Division of Red Hat
Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod  
Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom.
Registered in UK and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903  
Directors: Michael Cunningham (USA), Charlie Peters (USA), Matt  
Parsons (USA) and Brendan Lane (Ireland).