| |

What's Next for Web Services: GXA and Beyond
David Chappell - March
08, 2002
The core technologies of Web servicesSOAP, WSDL, and (to
a lesser degree) UDDIare certainly useful today. Yet nobody
could argue that they're fully mature. Much remains to be done,
and it's a safe bet that, one way or another, additional features
will find their way into the world of Web services. For this technology
family to become as significant as it promises to be, however, these
additions need to be done in a way that all vendors support.
Adding features isn't as simple as it sounds. Web services
are a rapidly moving area, one with lots of commercial potential.
In other words, big vendors believe that big dollars are at stake.
Reaching agreement in this environment won't be easy.
For the leading example, think about SOAP. This very simple protocol
allows anybody to add arbitrary headers to any message. Flexibility
is admirable, especially in the early days of a technology. Yet
if TCP had taken such a loose approach to packet definition, there
would be no such thing as the Internet today. Achieving effective,
full-featured interoperability among different vendor's SOAP
implementations requires agreement on how at least some of these
extra headers should look.
Toward this end, Microsoft in late 2001 announced its Global XML
Web Services Architecture (GXA). The GXA specifications define a
set of SOAP headers for addressing common problems. These headers,
and thus the services they provide, can be combined as needed for
a specific application. The GXA specs currently define headers in
four areas:
-
WS-Security: Provides a way to pass security credentials, such
as the identity of the client, and to indicate which options
(if any) are being used to provide integrity and confidentiality
for a SOAP message. An integrity service allows the message's
receiver to be certain that the message wasn't modified
in transit, while a confidentiality service typically encrypts
a message so it can't be read in transit.
-
WS-License: Provides a standard way to identify common kinds
of credentials, which are referred to as licenses. Among the
supported options are Kerberos tickets and X.509 certificates,
each of which relies on strong cryptographic techniques to allow
the receiver to verify a client's identity. WS-License
is typically used together with WS-Security because it defines
a concrete way to represent important security information.
-
WS-Routing: Defines header information that can be used to
route messages across intermediate SOAP nodes. Note that this
routing happens at the application level, so it's distinct
from the service network routers provide.
-
WS-Referral: Defines header information that allows configuring
SOAP implementations to correctly route SOAP messages. Unlike
WS-Routing, which is used to specify what path a particular
SOAP message should take, WS-Referral allows configuring of
the SOAP systems themselves to correctly route messages.
These four specifications were all created solely by Microsoft.
More recently, Microsoft and IBM have worked together to create
WS-Inspection. Unlike the technologies just defined, WS-Inspection
doesn't define new SOAP headers. Instead, it specifies a standard
XML-based format for describing which Web services are available
at a particular location. These so-called inspection documents provide
a simpler alternative to UDDI, although one that offers fewer features.
Defining standard solutions to common problems is important. There
are other enhancements that can also make Web services technology
more effective, however. One of these is a mapping of SOAP directly
to TCP, an option known as Direct Internet Message Encapsulation
(DIME). Doing this allows better performance than sending SOAP messages
over HTTP. Other forthcoming enhancements to this technology family
will likely include a language for defining multiple Web services
interactions and a way to guarantee reliable delivery of SOAP messages.
More additions are sure to come as Web services continue to work
their way into the fabric of modern computing.
It will be interesting to see how these vendor-defined specifications
are transformed into standards. Microsoft has indicated that the
GXA specs will be submitted to relevant standards bodies, such as
the Worldwide Web Consortium (W3C). Exactly how this will happen,
or when the process will complete isn't yet clear. Once implementations
appear, vendors are reluctant to change. Anybody who lived through
the browser wars, with Microsoft and Netscape each adding its own
features in advance of the W3C standards for HTML, can't help
but shudder at the prospect of repeating the experience.
It's a good sign that the two major players in Web services,
IBM and Microsoft, are working together. It could be that agreement
between these two is all that's really required, and everyone
else will end up falling behind. That is exactly what happened with
the first round of Web services technologies, and the result wasn't
bad at all. An even better sign is the recent formation of the Web
Services Interoperability (WS-1) group, with nearly every major
vendor on board. As long as implementations from different vendors
work together, however it happens, the rush to Web services isn't
going to stop.
|
|


Website
design and development by kmcreative.
KMCREATIVE is a Silicon Valley based graphic design firm specializing
in corporate collateral, web design, web development, identity,
medical illustration and product illustration.
|
 |