« March 05, 2003 | Main | March 07, 2003 »
March 06, 2003
Speaking at Federal Computer Week's CIO Summit
I've been asked to speak on Web Services at Federal Computer Week's CIO Summit in Atlanta on May 6th.
09:38 PM | Recommend This | Print This
GXA Components: WS Referral
I've been cataloging the GXA specifications and trying to provide my own roadmap to what's happening in that area. I've created an index to the articles under "Global XML Web Services Architecture." Today, the topic is the web service referral specification.
Microsoft describes the WS-Referral, or web services referral in this specification. WS-Referral is meant to be used in conjunction with the WS-Routing, the web services routing specification. Both of these specification anticipate and describe the behavior of pieces of software called "SOAP routers" that route SOAP messages along a path from their origin to their intended recipient. WS-Referral describes the format of messages that can be used to add or delete routes in these routers. Unlike the other specifications I've discussed, it does not appear in the message itself, but affects how the message is rewritten along the path.
To see how they work, let's walk through a sample routing of a message. This example, and the code is from the specification, although I've put it together into more of a narrative.
Consider the following simple configuration of two SOAP routers A and B:
We could use the following SOAP message, which contains a <path/> element signifying a WS-Routing directive to send the message along this path.
<S:Envelope xmlns:S="http://www.w3.org/2001/09/soap-envelope">
<S:Header>
<m:path xmlns:m="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/rp/">
<m:action>http://www.notification.org/update</m:action>
<m:to>soap://b.org</m:to>
<m:from>soap://a.org</m:from>
<m:id>mid:1000@a.org</m:id>
</m:path>
</S:Header>
<S:Body>
...
</S:Body>
</S:Envelope>
Now suppose that before sending the SOAP message shown above, we send the following referral to A:
<r:ref xmlns:r="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2001/10/referral">
<r:for>
<r:prefix>soap://b.org</r:prefix>
</r:for>
<r:if>
<r:ttl>43200000</r:ttl>
</r:if>
<r:go>
<r:via>soap://c.org</r:via>
</r:go>
<r:refId>mid:1234@some.host.org</r:refId>
</r:ref>
This referral message tells node A: for any message that is going to node B, if the referral is less than 12 hours (43,200,000 milliseconds) old then the message should go via node C. This creates the situation shown below:
Note that this is only true for message that meet the for and the conditions in the if.
Now, assume that we send the original SOAP message again. Node A will insert a <via/> element into the <path/> element to create this message:
<S:Envelope xmlns:S="http://www.w3.org/2001/09/soap-envelope">
<S:Header>
<m:path xmlns:m="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/rp/">
<m:action>http://www.notification.org/update</m:action>
<m:to>soap://b.org</m:to>
<m:fwd>
<m:via>soap://c.org</m:via>
</m:fwd>
<m:from>soap://a.org</m:from>
<m:id>mid:1001@a.org</m:id>
</m:path>
</S:Header>
<S:Body>
...
</S:Body>
</S:Envelope>
Note that this is what the message looks like when it leaves node A, headed for C. Node C will accept the message and route it to B.
There are other ways to use referral statements. They can be used, for example, to delete routes or to insert proxies for certain parts of a namespace on a node. The specification, of course, is much more involved than what I've shown, but this will give a general idea of the way WS-Referral is used and what the messages look like.
08:46 PM | Recommend This | Print This
HB 240 Passes Establishing a VC Fund of Funds
HB 240, which establishes a contingent tax credit backed "fund of funds," was passed by the Senate yesterday with some amendments and sent back to the house for concurrence. The House concurred and so now HB240 awaits the Governor's signature before it becomes law. Here is the bills text as ammended. Here is a complete list of actions on the bill. In the end, 21 Senators voted for the bill and 7 against. Looking at the list of names that voted against it surprises me a bit. I thought some of them were a little more progressive than this vote makes them appear. The Governor has apparently indicated that he'd sign the bill, nevertheless, if you haven't writen to the Governor's office to express your support, you should.
08:33 AM | Recommend This | Print This
eGovernment and Sex Offenders
Yesterday, the Supreme Court upheld the rights of States to publish the pictures and other identifying information of sex offenders on the web. Utah has an online sex offender registry that is pretty well put together. I believe this is a great application of eGovernment. The Government owns the data, its a public record, and putting it on the web gives transparency in an area that could make a real difference in people's lives.
08:01 AM | Recommend This | Print This
Time for Another Audit
According to this story in the Tribune legislative staffers in Utah have been counseled about talking to the press. I wonder if there will be an audit over this blatant gag order? After all, in the executive branch the press is one of the most important conduits that exists for employees to give their feedback to management.