RE: [soa-rm] On the topic of reference models...(now ESB)

From
Chiusano Joseph <>
Date
2005-12-07T16:26:12+00:00
ID
Thread
RE: [soa-rm] On the topic of reference models...(now ESB)
Thanks Jeff. 

 

To clarify to all, my intention was to make folks aware of this reference 
model news, and I did not in any way suggest that we include any mention of ESB 
in our SOA-RM (at least I don't recall doing so). Doing so would not make sense, 
as it is too specific a concept for a reference model. We may, however, 
discussion it in a reference architecture.

 

Joe

 

Joseph Chiusano

Associate

Booz Allen Hamilton

 

700 13th St. NW

Suite 1100

Washington, DC 20005

O: 202-508-6514  

C: 202-251-0731

Visit us online@ http://www.boozallen.com

 

  

  
  From: Jeffrey A Estefan 
  [mailto:] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 
  07, 2005 11:11 AM
To: 
Subject: 
  Re: [soa-rm] On the topic of reference models...(now ESB)

  

  
Hi Joe,

  
 

  
I've read the Sonic white paper (and several of 
  their white papers in the past).  They [Sonic] will continue to 
  insist that they invented the first ESB, or at least were the first 
  to coin the term; and so will Fiorano, and IONA, etc., etc.  I 
  attended the last several Enterprise Architect Summit conferences and 
  Chappell and van Huizen from Sonic always claim they invented the ESB; they 
  make a point of it.  And then you'd actually get the Fiorano CTO up on 
  the same stage we these guys and claim that they [Fiorano] created the first 
  ESB.  My point is to approach these guys with caution and try to 
  remain steadfast in seeing through the marketing hype.

  
 

  
I don't think we will want to include a 
  definition for ESB in our SOA-RM because although ESB is not a product, it is 
  an architectural best practice for implementing a SOA and thus better suited 
  for an architectural blueprints or reference architecture effort.  
  Incidentally, implementing an ESB requires an integrated set of middleware 
  services (i.e., technology) so again, out of our scope.  It is important 
  to note, however, that the ESB concept is intended to support multiple 
  architecture styles, e.g., SOAs, message-driven architectures, and 
  event-driven architectures.

  
 

  
So in summary, I would not "sign-up" for any 
  recommended "RM" or "standard lexicon" or whatever a specific middleware 
  vendor wishes to push, including Sonic.  They have a fine offering in 
  this space but again, I think our job (and I know you agree) is to remain 
  vendor-neutral.  Frankly, after reading their white papers, they are much 
  more focused on ESB architecture than a creating a true RM.  You 
  can see that they even refer to the W3C's WS Arch WG definition of SOA 
  rather than creating their own definition for SOA.

  
 

  
V/R, Jeff E.