WS Test Forum Doug Davis 01/19/2010. Life without WSTF Existing TCs/WGs mainly focus on their own specs Very few interoperability issues are actually.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
BPEL4WS Business Process Execution Language for Web Services Jim Clark eBusiness Strategist
Advertisements

Web Service Architecture
Upgrading the Oracle Applications: Going Beyond the Technical Upgrade Atlanta OAUG March 19, 1999 Robert Cooney.
Unit Testing in the OO Context(Chapter 19-Roger P)
“SG-Systems” (Smart Grid – Operational Applications Integration) “Boot Camp” Overview Greg Robinson, Co-Chair, SG-Systems Brent Hodges, Chair, SG-Systems.
WS Protocol Workshop Process Jorgen Thelin, Microsoft Corporation The path to interoperable Web Services specifications.
Web Service Ahmed Gamal Ahmed Nile University Bioinformatics Group
BiodiversityCatalogue How-Tos Robert Haines. BiodiversityCatalogue Home Hover over the ‘s for more information!
The FI-WARE Project – Base Platform for Future Service Infrastructures OCTOBER 2011 Presentation at proposers day.
Environmental Council of States Network Authentication and Authorization Services The Shared Security Component February 28, 2005.
Obstacles to PKI Deployment and Usage - Survey Results and Draft Action Plan Steve Hanna, Co-chair, OASIS PKI TC.
Intelligent Grid Solutions 1 / 18 Convergence of Grid and Web technologies Alexander Wöhrer und Peter Brezany Institute for Software.
J2ME Web Services Specification.  With the promise to ease interoperability and allow for large scale software collaboration over the Internet by offering.
OASIS PKI Action Plan – Overcoming Obstacles to PKI Deployment and Usage Steve Hanna, Co-Chair, OASIS PKI Technical Committee.
When will our bugs be fixed? When will our new features be added? When will the next release come out? Is my server up-to-date? Users Committers Program.
GFIPM Web Services Concept and Normative Standards GFIPM Delivery Team Meeting November 2011.
© JBoss Inc The need for context in Web Services Mark Little, presented by Kurt T Stam Red Hat.
Secure Systems Research Group - FAU Web Services Standards Presented by Keiko Hashizume.
Online Shopping e-Business ITCS451/951 Group Assignment Online Shopping e-Business Team Members: 1. Elmabourk Benlamma Dhany Setia Purnama
Project Proposal: Academic Job Market and Application Tracker Website Project designed by: Cengiz Gunay Client: Cengiz Gunay Audience: PhD candidates and.
The Early Life of WS-ReliableMessaging Where we are, and how we got here Jorgen Thelin Program Manager – WS-* Workshops Microsoft Corporation.
Web Services Inter- Operability CS409 Application Services Even Semester 2007.
S/W Project Management
Copyright © 2004 by The Web Services Interoperability Organization (WS-I). All Rights Reserved 1 Interoperability: Ensuring the Success of Web Services.
T Network Application Frameworks and XML Web Services and WSDL Sasu Tarkoma Based on slides by Pekka Nikander.
FIORANO FOR SAAS.  Fiorano addresses the need for integration technology that bridge the gap between SaaS providers and Consumers.  Fiorano enables.
Web Services (SOAP, WSDL, and UDDI)
Chapter 6 Introduction to Web Services. Objectives By study of the chapter, you will be able to: Describe what is Web services Describe what are differences.
What is Service Oriented Architecture ? CS409 Application Services Even Semester 2007.
OiCoN 2007Madeira Island Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG)  Automotive Industry ‘Vertical’ for North American Supply Chain Founded by.
10 Reasons to Use Google Analytics By: Errett Cord
Web Services Description Language CS409 Application Services Even Semester 2007.
How business and IT interoperate using SOA
Copyright © 2004 by The Web Services Interoperability Organization (WS-I). All Rights Reserved 1 Interoperability: Ensuring the Success of Web Services.
Promoting Web Services Interoperability Across Platforms, Applications and Programming Languages Basic Profile 1.0 August 12, 2003 Copyright © 2003 by.
® © 2009 Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc. Starting an Interoperability Experiment David Arctur, OGC Director, Interoperability Programs December 8, 2009.
Qusay H. Mahmoud CIS* CIS* Service-Oriented Computing Qusay H. Mahmoud, Ph.D.
INT-5: Integrate over the Web with OpenEdge® Web Services
WS-I Submission W3C XML Schema User Experiences Workshop June 2005 Redwood Shores, CA, USA Erik Johnson, Epicor Software.
95-843: Service Oriented Architecture 1 Master of Information System Management Service Oriented Architecture Lecture 7: BPEL Some notes selected from.
© 2013 IBM Corporation OSLC WG Transition **DRAFT** Plan 8 April 2013 Open Services for Lifecycle Collaboration Lifecycle integration inspired by the web.
Online Shopping e-Business ITCS451/951 Group Assignment Online Shopping e-Business Team Members: 1. Elmabourk Benlamma Dhany Setia Purnama
SCA Bindings Simon Holdsworth Piotr Przybylski. Agenda n SCA Bindings Overview l Bindings TC Charter n Bindings l Web Services Binding l JMS Binding l.
Online Shopping e-Business ITCS451/951 Group Assignment Online Shopping e-Business Team Members: 1. Elmabourk Benlamma Dhany Setia Purnama
INT-9: Implementing ESB Processes with OpenEdge ® and Sonic ™ David Cleary Principal Software Engineer.
WEB SERVICE DESCRIPTION LANGUAGE (WSDL). Introduction  WSDL is an XML language that contains information about the interface semantics and ‘administrivia’
Interoperability Testing. Work done so far WSDL subgroup Generated Web Service Description with aim for maximum interoperability between various SOAP.
Dyalog’08. Conga, SSL and WebServices Morten Kromberg Dyalog’08 - Elsinore.
Using WS-I to Build Secure Applications Anthony Nadalin Web Services Interoperability Organization (WS-I) Copyright 2008, WS-I, Inc. All rights reserved.
WS Protocol Workshop Process The Path to Real-world Interoperability Jorgen Thelin, Microsoft Corporation.
Managing Challenging Projects Presented to the class of: Dr. Jane Mackay M.J. Neely School of Business.
Interop Planning This is a brainstorm session, add as you wish Review Planning Logistics.
July 24, Web Services Distributed Management (WSDM) TC Submission: Web Services Manageability Heather Kreger IBM Title slide Igor.
July 28, 2004WSRF Technical Committee F2F meeting1 WSRP leveraging WSRF Use case for Portlets as WS-Resources.
Introduction to ITIL and ITIS. CONFIDENTIAL Agenda ITIL Introduction  What is ITIL?  ITIL History  ITIL Phases  ITIL Certification Introduction to.
Promoting Web services interoperability across platforms, applications and programming languages Overview Presentation September, 2003.
OpenID Certification June 7, 2016 Michael B. Jones Identity Standards Architect – Microsoft.
1 Seminar on SOA Seminar on Service Oriented Architecture BPEL Some notes selected from “Business Process Execution Language for Web Services” by Matjaz.
WS ►I Promoting Web services interoperability across platforms, applications and programming languages October, 2002.
Open Source for Interoperability Paul Fremantle VP, Apache Synapse Member, ASF CTO and Co-Founder, WSO2.
Cloud Computing Standards: Status, Needs and Prospects
Web Services Inter- Operability
T Network Application Frameworks and XML Web Services and WSDL Sasu Tarkoma Based on slides by Pekka Nikander.
Making Sense of the Alphabet Soup of Standards
Wsdl.
IFX Forum Overview September 28, 2015 © Copyright IFX Forum, Inc
Web Services Interoperability Organization
Grid Systems: What do we need from web service standards?
Steve Loughran SOAP Stack Interop Steve Loughran
Presentation transcript:

WS Test Forum Doug Davis 01/19/2010

Life without WSTF Existing TCs/WGs mainly focus on their own specs Very few interoperability issues are actually found during spec-wise interoperability testing - scenarios are very tightly scripted/scoped Scenarios are not based on customer usages Real-world problems aren't visible at the spec level so aren't identified WS-I is limited in the issues/scenarios it may investigate Limits work to specs that have exited SDOs WS-I has set a rather high bar to begin work on new profiles (Board approval) No forum for on-going or forward-looking testing Nor is there a forum for testing new specs under development Where do customers/vendors go if they have questions or issues? Cost of interop testing is too high Vendor Product Development/SQA teams require expertise in competitive product installation, deployment and development in order to test interoperability 2

WSTF Goals New Forum focused on developing and testing non-trivial scenarios Mainly customer driven, but allows for speculative scenarios as well Providing a means of continuous long term interoperability/regression testing Strengthen the WS foundation we’ve provided to the community Help expose interoperability issues before our customers see them Make it easy for new specs to be added as they are developed Provide “shared” test bed available for the entire WS community to use MxN testing Similar to the soap encoding tests used for soap many years ago Save time/effort – each company doesn’t need to setup everyone else’s endpoints Can test before products are shipped! Intention is for product teams to host/use these endpoints Pipeline for new specs/profiles/fixes to existing specs Identify potential gaps in our overall architecture Which should lead to fixing those gaps by working with the appropriate spec/profile owners Requirements for new Profiles, v.Next work for existing specs or even new specs 3

Main Deliverable: Scenarios Scenarios can be just about anything Unit test cases for WS specs Profile conformance tests Customer focused usage scenarios Consists of: Description of problem Set of "testcases" (message flows) with expected behavior from all parties WSDL, XSD, Sample Messages Findings 4

WSTF Testing Each Scenario also includes List of participants (list of endpoints) Test Result Matrix Run each night (testing client → service) Each testing participant can host Client – typically with a nice Web interface Service Testing client interface (HTTP) Ancillary info to aid users: config docs, code 5

WSTF Details Most work is private (mailing list, scenario development, votes...) Want people to feel free to discuss issues w/o looking bad However, very low bar for entry Sign a Participation Agreement Scenarios can be made public only after a vote by the implementers Votes: Requires at least 5 implementations + 2/3 ‘yes’ vote Provides a simple filtering to prevent diluting the value of the group Shows broad industry support for published scenarios Unpublished scenarios can still be tested, but nothing is made public They can be "announced" though with a 2/3 'yes' vote and 3 impls An "announced" scenario just has its abstract made public Testing Each scenario will have a list of endpoints (private and public lists) Endpoints are expected to be “long lived” New implementations (non-members) can test at will using ‘published’ scenarios and endpoints Interop issues are brought to the appropriate forum(s) by individuals not the group itself 6

Deliverable: Open Community Provide a community where most WS vendors can be queried at once Provide best chance for unbiased answers Provide formal and informal guidance for "WS Best Practices" Scenario Findings Mailing lists E.g. Review of profiles, specs... 7

Things you should know... Zero cost No dues or fees IBM pays for the web site (but no IBM logos, etc... ) Degree of participation is voluntary Members participate in any scenario they wish Varying degrees of involvement Monitor  Scenario Advocate  Scenario Implementer Anyone can simply monitor the mailing lists, however... Goal: WS Vendors become “implementers” Goal: WS Customers keep Vendors grounded in reality  Through monitoring and advocating/suggesting scenarios Pseudo Open-Source Model Community driven – similar to soapbuilders Code talks - limited politics (we hope) Not limited to just SOAP-style Web Services Looking at testing REST Web Services as well Nor are we precluded from doing domain specific testing E.g. schema/parsing validation testing 8

WSTF Status Went "live" on Dec 8 th, organizations / 103 members so far Vendors, Customers, Industry Consortiums, Standards Orgs – and individuals Web site: Charter and Participant’s Agreement are on web site CharterParticipant’s Agreement Initial Scenario Development Three scenarios have been published Two "specish" – testing SOAP and WS-Addressing  Basic ones to test the infrastructure of the group/soap stacks  Provide a base-line for more advanced scenarios Business Oriented – Purchase Order More under development We're already seeing external impact (fast turn-around): Issues in WS-I and OASIS (next slide) Customers identified holes in the architecture (e.g. jax-ws) 9

External impact so far... Guidance on faults for one-ways BP issue BP20116 – resolved per our recommendation Ambiguity around rejected RM CS/Offer RSP issue i150 – resolved per o/r WS-Trust WSDL was not BP compliant WSSX issue 169 – resolved per o/r WSA Fault Processing Rules for bad EPRs BP issue BP20121 – resolved per o/r BP issue BP20126(2.0)/BP12050(1.2) – resolved per o/r Sync and Async Operations within same Port BP issue BP20133(2.0)/BP12057(BP1.2) – under discussion RM Piggy-Backed ACKs should not be mU=1 RSP issue i171 – under discussion New spec under consideration... 10

Summary – Why WSTF? Leverage community and testing Allow WS vendors to test key scenarios before you do Allow WS vendors to enhance their regression tests with the scenarios that matter to you Use the WSTF community to validate your WS architecture and plans 11

THANK YOU! Contact: Doug Davis for more info Or Or Questions? 12