| Author |
Message
|
| MQIBM |
 Posted: Thu Aug 18, 2011 10:17 pm Post subject: Who control? Front or Middle or Back end (WSDL) |
 |
|
Newbie
Joined: 04 Aug 2011
Posts: 9
|
This is hard to debate but like to try it here.
A WSDL is been use throughout end-to-end system. MessageBroker as middle layer.
My question is who should enforce wsdl rules (example complusory field), front end layer (web application wsdl) or middle layer (WMB wsdl) or back end (another system wsdl).
Three of them having same wsdl (lets say WSDL ABC). the problem is maybe front end layer has WSDL ABC that is optional fields but back end layer has WSDL ABC complusory fields. In business requirement, the fields must be complusory. The front end application has rules to make complusory based on user interface but not for the wsdl front end.
Understand? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| MQIBM |
| Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2011 1:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 04 Aug 2011
Posts: 9
|
| no expert or knowledgeable guy can answer...so sad |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| smdavies99 |
| Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2011 2:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Council
Joined: 10 Feb 2003
Posts: 6076
Location: Somewhere over the Rainbow this side of Never-never land.
|
Hold on a moment there.
There is no SLA for getting an answer here. People give answers here out of the goodness of their heart.
You post early in the monning (UK/Europe) and want an answer when it is still dark on the other side of the Atlantic.
Patience Grasshopper!
_________________
WMQ User since 1999
MQSI/WBI/WMB/'Thingy' User since 2002
Linux user since 1995
Every time you reinvent the wheel the more square it gets (anon). If in doubt think and investigate before you ask silly questions. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| paintpot |
| Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2011 2:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
Centurion
Joined: 19 Sep 2005
Posts: 112
Location: UK
|
who can resist the invitation.
WSDL is a contract between consumer and provider - normally I would have the same WSDL everywhere, so your use case isn't valid.
Rules would then be enforced at each point (client and service) as a minimum. The integration layer is optional / can be treated as an extension of the service, and depends on how you run your architecture.
That's my 2p.
Last edited by paintpot on Fri Aug 19, 2011 4:55 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| lancelotlinc |
| Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2011 4:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 22 Mar 2010
Posts: 4941
Location: Bloomington, IL USA
|
Many implementations turn off validation on SOAP traffic because many companies prefer to validate at the business logic layer rather than the transport layer.
I didn't say it was right, or that I liked it, just an observation.
_________________
http://leanpub.com/IIB_Tips_and_Tricks
Save $20: Coupon Code: MQSERIES_READER |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| joebuckeye |
| Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2011 4:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Posts: 365
Location: Columbus, OH
|
As paintpot said, you are not using the same WSDL everywhere if one has optional fields and one has mandatory fields.
I guess the WSDL's could be the same but the schema's they refer to must be different then.
I have also seen 3rd party vendors give us WSDL's/schemas and we build our side of the transaction and then find out that they don't follow their own WSDL's/schemas. They turn off validation because they can't get it to work the way they want but keep the schema in there to prevent the tooling from complaining. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| lancelotlinc |
| Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2011 4:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 22 Mar 2010
Posts: 4941
Location: Bloomington, IL USA
|
You'd think banks or insurance companies would be the best citizens and keep the enforcement, but I find this is not the case. They don't want to loose business because the email address is non-conformant, for example.
_________________
http://leanpub.com/IIB_Tips_and_Tricks
Save $20: Coupon Code: MQSERIES_READER |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2011 4:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
A WSDL is very specifically designed to tightly enforce the contract between sender and receiver, including down to the logical content of individual fields.
If you are not following that contract, then you aren't using the WSDL and you aren't using WebServices.
You're just throwing some data around over HTTP.
If you don't want to use the strict point-to-point contracts of WebServices, maybe you should use something other than HTTP - something that is inherently loosely coupled and inherently content-agnostic.
Like MQ. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| joebuckeye |
| Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2011 4:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Posts: 365
Location: Columbus, OH
|
Totally agree but it is sad to look through our Datapower Web Service Proxies and see how many of them have validation turned off.
We are the SOA/ESB team and mainly use WMB and Datapower and we are supposed to provide governance over things like this but then the business side steps in and says that they don't have the time or money to make things compliant at this time and that once the solution is in production and working they will circle back and fix the validation issue.
Very rarely does that ever happen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2011 4:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| lancelotlinc wrote: |
| They don't want to loose business |
Loose business? Is this a new term for large numbers of optional fields? Or a business which is a bit left of centre, like loose women? 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| joebuckeye |
| Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2011 4:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Posts: 365
Location: Columbus, OH
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
You're just throwing some data around over HTTP.
If you don't want to use the strict point-to-point contracts of WebServices, maybe you should use something other than HTTP - something that is inherently loosely coupled and inherently content-agnostic. |
We are actually seeing a lot of people starting to use REST as a way to get away from our "harassment" about validating things going through the ESB.
But then they are getting away from the model of the SOA/ESB team providing governance (which is what the business claims they want) and more into the model of us merely providing a pipeline to different teams and/or vendors (what the business really wants). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2011 5:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
If you are not following that contract, then you aren't using the WSDL and you aren't using WebServices.
You're just throwing some data around over HTTP.
|
It is sad how many sites are wrapping data in a SOAP envelope and claiming that make the consuming app a Web Service. No WSDL, no nothing, just a SOAP namespace in the XML.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Fri Aug 19, 2011 5:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| joebuckeye wrote: |
| But then they are getting away from the model of the SOA/ESB team providing governance (which is what the business claims they want) and more into the model of us merely providing a pipeline to different teams and/or vendors (what the business really wants). |
I remain amazed how many business users move away from their stated requirements when it dawns on them what those requirements translate to on the ground.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| MQIBM |
| Posted: Sun Aug 21, 2011 11:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Newbie
Joined: 04 Aug 2011
Posts: 9
|
from what i can see, it is "common" practise to turn off the validation in WSDL. reason mainly because of time and $.i like the example of email.
sad but have to accept the fact of practical rather than follow rules. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mapa |
| Posted: Mon Aug 22, 2011 1:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 09 Aug 2001
Posts: 257
Location: Malmö, Sweden
|
| joebuckeye wrote: |
We are actually seeing a lot of people starting to use REST as a way to get away from our "harassment" about validating things going through the ESB.
|
Using a RESTful approach you can still require validation of content.
Or do you mean that they skip the broker?
Still I think many(most) people don't actually know how to build RESTful Web Services.
_________________
Brgds, Magnus Palmér
Enfo Zystems |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
