[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [regrep] "ebXML Registry and Web services" Federal Pilot
<Quote> Is there any reason why we cannot use two (or more?) registries and show them pointing at registry objects in each others domain? (Like a test case for federation) </Quote> I second this idea big time. I think demonstrating the concept of federated registries interacting would be fantastic. Joe Duane Nickull wrote: > > I completely disagree with Kathryns' statement. Having a vendor step up > and donate the use of a product for a PoC or ilot is a big commitment > for a vendor. Who has supported this (and other) groups over the last > three years? Who pays the bills for OASIS's memberships? It is largely > the vendor community. I personally have spent hundreds of personal > hours working on specifications, attending meetings, spending time away > from family etc. to make sure this and other work is done. I do so > freely and out of my personal interest that this work needs to happen. > I personally spent hundreds of ours arguing with my ex-employer begging > them that we should build a registry because people will need PoC's. > Let's carefully consider this decision. Having one or two vendors > donate software for a PoC does not show favoratism from the TC. > > If we chose the ebXMLrr, it should be because it matches the criteria > for the project and nothing else, if there are other choices. > > I would argue against using the ebXMLrr for a few reasons. The first is > that the clients require a fair amount of expertise to build and install > on every persons machine who will use the registry (unless they build > their own client - a far more daunting task). I was also under the > opinion that there are over 30+ outstanding bugs needing to be > addresses, some over 30 days old. (Please correct me if I am wrong). > Nonetheless, it is a solid reference implementation of the registry server. > > Idea: > > Yellow Dragon Software would like its' registry product considered for > this project too. Is there any reason why we cannot use two (or more?) > registries and show them pointing at registry objects in each others > domain? (Like a test case for federation) > > If it is going to be one and one only registry, then let's chose wisely > based on a registry that meets the set of requirements for the pilot, > not an abitrary choice based on the fact that their is a non-commercial > interest. The Messaging team contents with interoperability demos > between 10 or more commercial products. They don't appear to be playing > favourites. UDDI is the same with multiple vendors. Even ebXML did > PoC's with several vendors - no problem. > > Let's see the list of requirements for the PoC , then decide. That is > the way any project should proceed IMHO. > > Duane Nickull > > Breininger, Kathryn R wrote: > > >About the pilot project - it would probably be best to try to use an open source implementation. As a Standards TC, we have to be very careful about not appearing to endorse a particular vendor product. > > > > > > -- > *************************************************** > Yellow Dragon Software - http://www.yellowdragonsoft.com > Web Services & ebXML Messaging / Registry Downloads > Project Team Lead - UN/CEFACT eBusiness Architecture > Phone: +1 (604) 738-1051 - Canada: Pacific Standard Time > Direct: +1 (604) 726-3329
begin:vcard n:Chiusano;Joseph tel;work:(703) 902-6923 x-mozilla-html:FALSE url:www.bah.com org:Booz | Allen | Hamilton;IT Digital Strategies Team adr:;;8283 Greensboro Drive;McLean;VA;22012; version:2.1 email;internet:chiusano_joseph@bah.com title:Senior Consultant fn:Joseph M. Chiusano end:vcard
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]