I'm off to give a presentation on DSI and SDM this afternoon and so have been doing a ton of prep. At the same time there is a lot of discussion inside Microsoft about what architectural guidance that we can give on top of DSL's, SOA and DSI. We have MSF and MOF today but it seems to me that they don’t meet quite what is needed and will certainly need some changes as things like Modelling, SOA and DSI (MSD) take off.
At the same time I look at what I do across heterogeneous applications with things like my Lightweight Architectural Design Process (LADP) and these just don’t seem to fit very well with a heavyweight MSD approach. I think I will bounce this off my audience this afternoon to see what they think.
That's the joy of my approach to presentations, I don’t pretend to know the answers so I can ask the audience; as they are normally smarter than I am they come up with great ideas that I can use!
What did your audience say?
Alas not much. We did have an interesting discussion about the best way of presenting information / requests beck to microsoft.
So what guidance do you have on dealing with massively heterogenous SOA end-points, or, as I like to call it, a positive lather of SOAPY points. I'm looking at no-two-end-points-alike 2-3K end-points in an application type scenarios that must deal easily and well with adding new end-points on the fly. . .
Big Big topic. Basically you have to generate a set of service schemas and as is deifintions for each service and then have a common but extensible corp schema held by a czar (not a repository) which everyone has to meet. I have been to a number of companies who have done this. There are a number of slide decks around which talk about it. Email me if you want more info