axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Yuhichi Nakamura" <NAKAM...@jp.ibm.com>
Subject RE: Architecture consideration
Date Fri, 13 Apr 2001 13:47:29 GMT

I have two requirements.
First, AxisEngine instance(s) should be through multiple transports,
i.e. an engine might be accessed via HTTP and SMTP, so that it
can be easily maintained.  This does not lead us to EJB directly,
rather we need to get AxisEngine worked in an different JVM, and it
is accessed by tranport listener via some means tcp/ip, rmi, etc.
Second, from security perspective, I want to rely on some
solid security architecture, especiallly authorization.
I think that J2EE satisfies the requirements, and is more importantly
fairly promised.  With J2EE, it is very natural to provide the engine
as EJB object.
Furthermore, this approach does not impact on the current
architecture.
The current stuff (non-EJB) is still valid.
Regards,

Yuhichi Nakamura
IBM Tokyo Research Laboratory
Tel: +81-462-73-4668


From: "Doug Davis" <dug@us.ibm.com> on 2001/04/13 20:34

Please respond to axis-dev@xml.apache.org

To:   axis-dev@xml.apache.org
cc:
Subject:  RE: Architecture consideration



Perhaps someone could go into a little more details here
for me.  When you guys talk about making sure that Axis can
play in an Enterprise solution (EJBs...) what does that
mean?  Take Apache SOAP v2, using the EJB pluggable providers
it can use EJBs, but I'm assuming you guys mean more to it
than that, right?  Does it mean that the entry point into
the SOAP server needs to be an EJB?  What are the list of
requirements that you guys need fulfilled?
thanks,
-Dug


"Yuhichi Nakamura" <NAKAMURY@jp.ibm.com> on 04/12/2001 09:42:02 PM

Please respond to axis-dev@xml.apache.org

To:   axis-dev@xml.apache.org
cc:
Subject:  RE: Architecture consideration




Make sense.
So Axis should allows users to set up light-weight configrations such
as servlet/jsp-based as well as enterprise configrations including
EJB, JMS, etc.  Off course, basic componets should be shared as much
as possible from Axis devloper point of view (as Dug indicated).
Regards,

Yuhichi Nakamura
IBM Tokyo Research Laboratory
Tel: +81-46-215-4668
Fax: +81-46-215-7413


From: Michael Brennan <Michael_Brennan@Allegis.com> on 2001/04/13 10:13

Please respond to axis-dev@xml.apache.org

To:   "'axis-dev@xml.apache.org'" <axis-dev@xml.apache.org>
cc:
Subject:  RE: Architecture consideration



By "non-J2EE", I really mean servlets and JSPs without EJBs. (Sorry for the
ambiguity. I should have been more specific.)

I think a simple web services model for servlets can attract many
developers
who are not using EJBs. I would also add that even for those developers who
are using more of the J2EE platform than just servlets and JSPs, there may
be other non-EJB services they want to expose as a web service. For
instance, a servlet interacting with an EIS system using a J2EE Connector
interface, or perhaps a proprietary integration API.

Web services have the potential to open many doors that EJBs cannot open.
In
addition, a simple web services model could attract many developers who are
intimidated by the constantly growing complexity of the J2EE model.
Certainly, though, a sound web services architecture should also be able to
support those developers who need those richer J2EE services, as well.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Yuhichi Nakamura [mailto:NAKAMURY@jp.ibm.com]
> Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 6:05 PM
> To: axis-dev@xml.apache.org
> Subject: RE: Architecture consideration
>
>
>
> Good point.
> Can I restate "Axis is based on J2EE, but we should provide non-EJB
> version also"?  Would you tell me what non-J2EE environments
> means exactly?  Maybe since I am looking at enterprise applications,
> I only see J2EE servers such JRun, WebLogic, WebSpehre, etc.
> Which products are non-J2EE servers?
> Best regards,
>
> Yuhichi Nakamura
> IBM Tokyo Research Laboratory
> Tel: +81-46-215-4668
> Fax: +81-46-215-7413
>
>
> From: Michael Brennan <Michael_Brennan@Allegis.com> on
> 2001/04/13 09:50
>
> Please respond to axis-dev@xml.apache.org
>
> To:   "'axis-dev@xml.apache.org'" <axis-dev@xml.apache.org>
> cc:
> Subject:  RE: Architecture consideration
>
>
>
> > From: Yuhichi Nakamura [mailto:NAKAMURY@jp.ibm.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2001 5:48 PM
> > To: axis-dev@xml.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: Architecture consideration
> > [...]
> > Apparently, Servlet+EJB is much slower than just Servlet.
> > I do not know how much slow, and how acceptable.
> > However, the direciton of application server is J2EE.  Why
> > not based on it?
>
> I hope the team will consider supporting Axis in non-J2EE
> environments. It
> would be a mistake to think that everyone using server-side
> Java are using
> J2EE servers. Some folks are balking at the cost and
> complexity of such
> servers and just sticking with servlets.
>
> Axis should play well in J2EE environments, but I think
> requiring J2EE will
> shut out a large audience of prospective users.
>
> (Just my 2 cents.)
>
>
>









Mime
View raw message