| Author |
Message
|
| mapa |
 Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 9:28 am Post subject: Using WMB for B2B? |
 |
|
Master
Joined: 09 Aug 2001
Posts: 257
Location: Malmö, Sweden
|
Not sure it should go here or under General Discussion, but anyway.
I got curious of how many of you use the WMB for B2B and converting EDIFACT and ANSI X.12 etc.
If you do use it, are you building home-made stuff to handle partner configuration or do you go via a WPG, Datapower or something else?
I find myself still regarding the WMB as an A2A broker, but maybe I am wrong?
Reading a Gartner report for this area they see that companies are looking for one platform, and one of the weaknesses they saw for IBM was the vast number of overlapping products.
http://www.gartner.com/technology/media-products/reprints/microsoft/vol2/article3/article3.html
At a previous employment I was tech lead in selecting a new B2B platform in 2008 and we actually ended up selecting Sterling Commerce GIS and not IBM (well, it is IBM now since they bought Sterling later), even though we were using the WMB for A2A already. The IBM solution at that time, complementing the broker with WPG and WTX actually placed third, with SeeBurger BIS at second place.
In my opinion (and experience) a mature B2B should have a complete repository of existing EDIFACT standards. We investigated buying MRM EDIFACT from IBM Dublin (not sure this is still the option or if there are others?) in around 2003 or 2004 I believe but the price was the same as the full license for the B2B gateway we used back then
_________________
Brgds, Magnus Palmér
Enfo Zystems |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 9:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
Well, I tend to consider broker to be a general purpose application development environment, rather than an A2A broker.
But then, I also consider "B2B" to cover a significantly larger scope than just EDIFACT and Ansi X.12. So my opinions may not match yours.
Broker is good for a lot of things, especially as it gets enhanced with support for more protocols (email, ftp, tcp/ip, etc). Would I necessarily use it to support a mission-critical function that sits in a well-defined and well understood niche, like managed file transfer or EDIFACT/AnsiX12 comms, instead of using a special purpose tool? It depends on my budget.
I'd certainly use Broker to manage any interface to any special purpose tool and make it available and manageable from the enterprise. (the whole point of an ESB in general...). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mapa |
| Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 9:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 09 Aug 2001
Posts: 257
Location: Malmö, Sweden
|
Yes, B2B is more than EDIFACT and Ansi X.12, I personally agree but for many traditional manufacturing companies it is still this, using ORDERS D96.A and VAN providers.
And yes, the broker gets better and better with every version *biting my tongue*.
I still prefer Java adapters doing ftp, email, databases and connecting them with the WMQ network. Actually still never used the file/ftp node...
Guess it is time to re-evaluate the position of the broker.
_________________
Brgds, Magnus Palmér
Enfo Zystems |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 9:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| mapa wrote: |
| I still prefer Java adapters doing ftp, email, databases and connecting them with the WMQ network. Actually still never used the file/ftp node... |
There's nothing wrong with using adapters (and at least one poster here advocates the use of Java for all things including internal functions) but if you've spent all the money on WMB (which isn't cheap), why "waste" the money developing, documenting and maintaining functions the broker will happily do for you? With the added advantage you'll never have to explain to your manager you're working on the problem & don't have an ETA on the fix; you raise a PMR and point said manager in the direction of your IBM account rep.... 
(That could just be me)
| mapa wrote: |
| Guess it is time to re-evaluate the position of the broker. |
Which version of WMB was used in the evaluation you describe above?
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 9:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
| I tend to consider broker to be a general purpose application development environment, |
With it's own place in a software stack, distinct and separate from WAS and other components.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 9:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| if you've spent all the money on WMB (which isn't cheap), |
The new Entry edition is pretty reasonable... and the Starter and Remote Adapter editions are at least not horrendously expensive...
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 9:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| mqjeff wrote: |
| Vitor wrote: |
| if you've spent all the money on WMB (which isn't cheap), |
The new Entry edition is pretty reasonable... and the Starter and Remote Adapter editions are at least not horrendously expensive... |
Well alright.
But it's not $39.99 from BestBuy.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mapa |
| Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 10:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 09 Aug 2001
Posts: 257
Location: Malmö, Sweden
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| mapa wrote: |
| Guess it is time to re-evaluate the position of the broker. |
Which version of WMB was used in the evaluation you describe above? |
I was referring to my personal view of how to position the broker.
If you refer to the project selecting a new B2B it was WMB 6.0 at that time, WTX 8.1 and WPG 6.1. If I remember correctly there was still no support for WTX maps in WPG, even though it was planned.
I've been using the broker ever since 1.1 so I guess in some ways I've been too good(?) at keeping it is as simple as possible and being very conservative in using some of the new functionality.
Also when prefering the Java adapters the scenario was having the production brokers at one datacenter and then the end systems were connected via a global WMQ network and WMQ is really good at sending data over unreliable connections if you configure the channels for that. Doing ODBC to the other side of the world is not that good.
_________________
Brgds, Magnus Palmér
Enfo Zystems |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 10:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| mapa wrote: |
| If you refer to the project selecting a new B2B it was WMB 6.0 at that time |
Which did lack ftp, email and the other things you mention writing adaptors for. And WTX support.
| mapa wrote: |
| I've been using the broker ever since 1.1 |
Pedantically it wasn't broker. It wasn't broker until 5.0.
| mapa wrote: |
| Also when prefering the Java adapters the scenario was having the production brokers at one datacenter and then the end systems were connected via a global WMQ network and WMQ is really good at sending data over unreliable connections if you configure the channels for that. Doing ODBC to the other side of the world is not that good. |
I'm not saying don't use. I'm saying leverage the software. If you've got long distance, unreliable connections then obviously you use WMQ.
I'm saying don't use Java to send emails or read files off the broker machine's file system. 
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mapa |
| Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Master
Joined: 09 Aug 2001
Posts: 257
Location: Malmö, Sweden
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| mapa wrote: |
| I've been using the broker ever since 1.1 |
Pedantically it wasn't broker. It wasn't broker until 5.0. |
True, but I've called it for the "IBM broker" all these years and still do 
| Vitor wrote: |
I'm not saying don't use. I'm saying leverage the software. If you've got long distance, unreliable connections then obviously you use WMQ.
I'm saying don't use Java to send emails or read files off the broker machine's file system. |
Then again, I often reimplement other's mappings they done in the mapping node to pure ESQL in a compute node (unless it is just really straight-forward one-to-one mappings that you can do via map by name)...  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| lancelotlinc |
| Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 10:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
Jedi Knight
Joined: 22 Mar 2010
Posts: 4941
Location: Bloomington, IL USA
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| mqjeff wrote: |
| Vitor wrote: |
| if you've spent all the money on WMB (which isn't cheap), |
The new Entry edition is pretty reasonable... and the Starter and Remote Adapter editions are at least not horrendously expensive... |
Well alright.
But it's not $39.99 from BestBuy. |
I believe dot net is reaching that price point.
_________________
http://leanpub.com/IIB_Tips_and_Tricks
Save $20: Coupon Code: MQSERIES_READER |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 10:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| lancelotlinc wrote: |
| I believe dot net is reaching that price point. |
Express version's been free for a while.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| mqjeff |
| Posted: Wed Aug 24, 2011 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand Master
Joined: 25 Jun 2008
Posts: 17447
|
| lancelotlinc wrote: |
| Vitor wrote: |
| mqjeff wrote: |
| Vitor wrote: |
| if you've spent all the money on WMB (which isn't cheap), |
The new Entry edition is pretty reasonable... and the Starter and Remote Adapter editions are at least not horrendously expensive... |
Well alright.
But it's not $39.99 from BestBuy. |
I believe dot net is reaching that price point. |
and worth every penny. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
