4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
-
Upload
dscarlatti -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
0
Transcript of 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
1/38
SWIM-SUIT & ICOGTechnology SelectionDario Di Crescenzo (Selex SI)
David Scarlatti (Boeing)
15/05/2008 AP4/SWIM Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM)1
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
2/38
Overall SWIM-SUIT TechnologySelection Process
15/05/2008 AP4/SWIM Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) 2
Requirements
(WP 1.5)
Set of Criteria
Scenarios
(WP 1.6)
Architectural
Patterns
Candidate
Technologies
Selection
Matrix
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
3/38
Set of Criteria for evaluation oftechnologies
15/05/2008 AP4/SWIM Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) 4
Requirements
Set of Criteria
Technical knowledge available at partner
Applicability for Wide Area Network (WAN)
Scalability
Robustness
Flexibility
ReliabilityMessage overhead
Portability
Manageability
Interoperability
Suitability for Near Real Time
COTS selection
Use of standards
Availability of IDE
Support for Security
The different criteria are grouped by topicshaving different weights:
Network Performance
e.g. Message overhead
Efficiency
e.g. Reliability, Robustness, Scalability
Maintainability and Management
e.g. Flexibility, Manageability..
Stability and Evolutivity
e.g. Interoperability, Use of Standards ..
Security
Support for Security
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
4/38
Scalability
Robustness
Use of standardMessage Overhead
For each property a value in the range from 0 to 4 has been assigned
0 - Technology does not lean on standard.
1
2 - Technology leans on a new standard (durability not
guaranteed)
3
4 - Technology leans on mature and widespread standards.
The Criteria are divided in two groups: the Swim Criteria are those that must be considered
allocated to the SWIM project, while the SWIM-SUIT Criteria that are related to SWIM-
Prototype aiming to more pragmatic issues in the short time.
Set of Criteria for evaluation oftechnologies
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
5/38
Set of Criteria for evaluation oftechnologies
15/05/2008 AP4/SWIM Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) 6
5.4 ROBUSTNESSSection 3.2.3 of "Information Content and Service Requirements" definesrobustness and details eleven requirements for SWIM. Some of theserequirements will drive to specific design practices and architecture patterns,
especially those related to redundancy and fault tolerance (stress conditions).Other will impose special functional design, mainly the ones related to cope witherroneous or corrupt data (invalid input). Here we consider the impact of the
requirements on the underlying technologies to be used; mainly its level ofsupport to distributed and redundant architectures.Robustness can be improved too if the technology shows some self-testingcapabilities .
Related Requirements:SWIM-SYS-ROB-010 TO SWIM-SYS-ROB-110
Each technology will be scored this way:
0 - Technology does not support redundancy12 - Technology supports redundancy34 - Technology supports redundancy, has self-testing capabilities and a record ofstability (support invalid inputs gracefully)
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
6/38
Architectural Patterns fromscenarios
15/05/2008 AP4/SWIM Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) 7
synchronous
coupled
Request /
Reply
asynchronous
decoupled
Publish /Subscribe
Scenarios
(WP 1.6)
Architectural
Patterns
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
7/38
Initial Candidate Technologies
15/05/2008 AP4/SWIM Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) 8
COMMON OBJECT REQUEST BROKER ARCHITECTURE (CORBA)
DATA DISTRIBUTION SERVICE (DDS)
J2EE CONNECTOR ARCHITECTURE (JCA)
ENTERPRISE SERVICE BUS (ESB)
WEB SERVICES
ELECTRONIC BUSINESS USING EXTENSIBLE MARKUPLANGUAGE (EBXML)
MESSAGE ORIENTED MIDDLEWARE (MOM)
COLLABORATIVE DATABASES
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
8/38
Initial Candidate Technologies
15/05/2008 AP4/SWIM Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) 9
COMMON OBJECT REQUEST BROKER ARCHITECTURE (CORBA)
DATA DISTRIBUTION SERVICE (DDS)
J2EE CONNECTOR ARCHITECTURE (JCA)
ENTERPRISE SERVICE BUS (ESB)
WEB SERVICES
ELECTRONIC BUSINESSUSINGEXTENSIBLE MARKUP LANGUAGE (EBXML)
MESSAGE ORIENTED MIDDLEWARE (MOM)
COLLABORATIVE DATABASESCollaborative Databases are not standardized,federation service is linked to a specific product
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
9/38
Initial Candidate Technologies
15/05/2008 AP4/SWIM Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) 10
COMMON OBJECT REQUEST BROKER ARCHITECTURE (CORBA)
DATA DISTRIBUTION SERVICE (DDS)
J2EE CONNECTOR ARCHITECTURE (JCA)
ENTERPRISE SERVICE BUS (ESB)
WEB SERVICES
ELECTRONIC BUSINESSUSINGEXTENSIBLE MARKUP LANGUAGE (EBXML)
MESSAGE ORIENTED MIDDLEWARE (MOM)
COLLABORATIVE DATABASESCollaborative Databases are not standardized,federation service is linked to a specific product
JCA connectors are not furthersince they seems a weakalternative to other technologieslike CORBA or Web Services
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
10/38
Initial Candidate Technologies
15/05/2008 AP4/SWIM Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) 11
COMMON OBJECT REQUEST BROKER ARCHITECTURE (CORBA)
DATA DISTRIBUTION SERVICE (DDS)
J2EE CONNECTOR ARCHITECTURE (JCA)
ENTERPRISE SERVICE BUS (ESB)
WEB SERVICES
ELECTRONIC BUSINESSUSINGEXTENSIBLE MARKUP LANGUAGE (EBXML)
MESSAGE ORIENTED MIDDLEWARE (MOM)
COLLABORATIVE DATABASESCollaborative Databases are not standardized,federation service is linked to a specific product
JCA connectors are not furthersince they seems a weakalternative to other technologieslike CORBA or Web Services
WebServices and ebXML are using the sametechnology , Web Services are more flexible
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
11/38
Final Candidate Technologies
15/05/2008 AP4/SWIM Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) 12
COMMON OBJECT REQUEST BROKER ARCHITECTURE(CORBA)
DATA DISTRIBUTION SERVICE (DDS)
ENTERPRISE SERVICE BUS (ESB)
WEB SERVICES
MESSAGE ORIENTED MIDDLEWARE (MOM)
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
12/38
Final Candidate Technologies.vs. Architectural Patterns
15/05/2008 AP4/SWIM Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) 13
CORBA ESB Web services (J2EE)Request / Reply
JMS Web services Notification ESB CORBA Notification Service DDS
Publish / Subscribe
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
13/38
Split of set of Criteria forevaluation of technologies
15/05/2008 AP4/SWIM Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) 14
Applicability for Wide Area Network (WAN)ScalabilityRobustnessFlexibilityReliability
Message overheadPortabilityManageabilityInteroperabilitySuitability for Near Real TimeUse of standardsSupport for Security
Availability of IDETechnical knowledge available at partnerCOTS selection
SWIM
Criteria
SWIM-SUITCriteria
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
14/38
Selection Matrix
15/05/2008 AP4/SWIM Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) 15
Criteria Weight CORBA
ESB
Request/
Reply
Web
services
(J2EE) MOM (JMS)
Web
services
Notification
ESB
Publish/
Subscribe
CORBA
Notification
Service DDS
Applicabil ity for Wide Area Network (WAN) 10,0% 3,0 3,0 2,0 3,0 2,0 3,0 3,0 4,0
Message overhead 10,0% 3,0 3,0 2,0 2,0 2,0 3,0 2,0 4,0
Network Performance 20,0% 0,6 0,6 0,4 0,5 0,4 0,6 0,5 0,8
Suitability for Near Real Time 5,0% 3,0 2,0 1,0 1,0 1,0 2,0 1,0 4,0
Reliability 5,0% 4,0 3,0 4,0 4,0 4,0 3,0 3,0 4,0
Robustness 10,0% 3,0 4,0 4,0 4,0 4,0 4,0 3,0 4,0
Scalability 10,0% 3,0 3,0 3,0 3,0 3,0 3,0 3,0 4,0
Efficiency 30,0% 1,0 1,0 1,0 1,0 1,0 1,0 0,8 1,2
Flexibility 6,5% 3,0 4,0 4,0 3,0 3,0 4,0 3,0 3,0
Manageability 6,5% 3,0 4,0 4,0 3,0 4,0 3,0 3,0 3,0
Portability 7,0% 3,0 3,0 4,0 2,0 3,0 2,0 3,0 3,0
Mantainability and Management 20,0% 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,5 0,7 0,6 0,6 0,6
Interoperability 10,0% 4,0 4,0 4,0 4,0 4,0 4,0 4,0 4,0
Use of standards 10,0% 4,0 3,0 4,0 3,0 4,0 3,0 4,0 2,0
Stability and evolutivity 20,0% 0,8 0,7 0,8 0,7 0,8 0,7 0,8 0,6
Support for Security 10,0% 3,0 4,0 4,0 2,0 4,0 4,0 3,0 2,0
Security 10,0% 0,3 0,4 0,4 0,2 0,4 0,4 0,3 0,2
Percentage check 100,0%
3,3 3,4 3,4 2,9 3,2 3,2 3,0 3,4
Availab ility of IDE 35,0% 2,0 3,0 4,0 4,0 2,0 2,0 1,0 3,0
Technical knowledge available at partner 25,0% 3,0 2,0 4,0 4,0 1,0 2,0 1,0 3,0
COTS s election 40,0% 2,0 3,0 4,0 4,0 2,0 3,0 3,0 1,0
Percentage check 100,0%
2,3 2,8 4,0 4,0 1,8 2,4 1,8 2,2
2,8 3,1 3,7 3,4 2,5 2,8 2,4 2,8
SWIM
Criteria
SWIM
SUIT
Criteria
Score
SWIM Criteria Score
Average of SWIM & SWIM-SUIT Criteria
Publish/Subscribe
SWIM-SUIT Criteria Score
Request/Reply
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
15/38
Selection Matrix
15/05/2008 AP4/SWIM Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) 16
Criteria Weight CORBA
ESB
Request/
Reply
Web
services
(J2EE)
Applicabi lity for Wide Area Network (WAN) 10,0% 3,0 3,0 2,0
Message overhead 10,0% 3,0 3,0 2,0
Network Performance 20,0% 0,6 0,6 0,4
Suitability for Near Real Time 5,0% 3,0 2,0 1,0
Reliability 5,0% 4,0 3,0 4,0Robustness 10,0% 3,0 4,0 4,0
Scalability 10,0% 3,0 3,0 3,0
Efficiency 30,0% 1,0 1,0 1,0
Flexibility 6,5% 3,0 4,0 4,0
Manageability 6,5% 3,0 4,0 4,0
Portability 7,0% 3,0 3,0 4,0
Mantainability and Management 20,0% 0,6 0,7 0,8
Interoperability 10,0% 4,0 4,0 4,0
Use of standards 10,0% 4,0 3,0 4,0
Stability and evolutivity 20,0% 0,8 0,7 0,8
Support for Security 10,0% 3,0 4,0 4,0
Security 10,0% 0,3 0,4 0,4
Percentage check 100,0%
3,3 3,4 3,4
SWIM
Criteria
SWIM Criteria Score
Request/Reply
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
16/38
Selection Matrix
15/05/2008 AP4/SWIM Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) 17
Availability of IDE 35,0% 2,0 3,0 4,0
Technical knowledge available at partner 25,0% 3,0 2,0 4,0
COTS selection 40,0% 2,0 3,0 4,0
Percentage check 100,0%
2,3 2,8 4,0
SWIM
SUITCriteria
Score
SWIM-SUIT Criteria Score
Criteria Weight CORBA
ESB
Request/
Reply
Web
services
(J2EE)
Request/Reply
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
17/38
Selection Matrix
15/05/2008 AP4/SWIM Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) 18
MOM (JMS)
Web
services
Notification
ESB
Publish/
Subscribe
CORBA
Notification
Service DDS
3,0 2,0 3,0 3,0 4,0
2,0 2,0 3,0 2,0 4,0
0,5 0,4 0,6 0,5 0,8
1,0 1,0 2,0 1,0 4,0
4,0 4,0 3,0 3,0 4,0
4,0 4,0 4,0 3,0 4,0
3,0 3,0 3,0 3,0 4,0
1,0 1,0 1,0 0,8 1,2
3,0 3,0 4,0 3,0 3,0
3,0 4,0 3,0 3,0 3,0
2,0 3,0 2,0 3,0 3,0
0,5 0,7 0,6 0,6 0,64,0 4,0 4,0 4,0 4,0
3,0 4,0 3,0 4,0 2,0
0,7 0,8 0,7 0,8 0,6
2,0 4,0 4,0 3,0 2,0
0,2 0,4 0,4 0,3 0,2
2,9 3,2 3,2 3,0 3,4
Publish/Subscribe
Criteria Weight
Applicab ility for Wide Area Network (WAN) 10,0%
Message overhead 10,0%
Network Performance 20,0%
Suitability for Near Real Tim e 5,0%
Reliability 5,0%
Robustness 10,0%
Scalability 10,0%
Efficiency 30,0%
Flexibility 6,5%
Manageability 6,5%
Portability 7,0%
Mantainability and Management 20,0%Interoperability 10,0%
Use of standards 10,0%
Stability and evolutivity 20,0%
Support for Security 10,0%
Security 10,0%
Percentage check 100,0%
SWIM
Criteria
SWIM Criteria Score
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
18/38
Selection Matrix
15/05/2008 AP4/SWIM Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) 19
4,0 2,0 2,0 1,0 3,0
4,0 1,0 2,0 1,0 3,0
4,0 2,0 3,0 3,0 1,0
4,0 1,8 2,4 1,8 2,2
Availability of IDE 35,0%
Technical knowledge available at partner 25,0%
COTS selection 40,0%
Percentage check 100,0%
SWIM
SUIT
Criteria
Score
SWIM-SUIT Criteria Score
Criteria Weight MOM (JMS)
Web
services
Notification
ESB
Publish/
Subscribe
CORBA
Notification
Service DDS
Publish/Subscribe
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
19/38
Selection Matrix FinalSelection
15/05/2008 AP4/SWIM Technical Interchange Meeting (TIM) 20
Criteria Weight CORBA
ESB
Request/
Reply
Web
services
(J2EE) MOM (JMS)
Web
services
Notification
ESB
Publish/
Subscribe
CORBA
Notification
Service DDS
Applicabil ity for Wide Area Network (WAN) 10,0% 3,0 3,0 2,0 3,0 2,0 3,0 3,0 4,0
Message overhead 10,0% 3,0 3,0 2,0 2,0 2,0 3,0 2,0 4,0
Network Performance 20,0% 0,6 0,6 0,4 0,5 0,4 0,6 0,5 0,8
Suitability for Near Real Time 5,0% 3,0 2,0 1,0 1,0 1,0 2,0 1,0 4,0
Reliability 5,0% 4,0 3,0 4,0 4,0 4,0 3,0 3,0 4,0
Robustness 10,0% 3,0 4,0 4,0 4,0 4,0 4,0 3,0 4,0
Scalability 10,0% 3,0 3,0 3,0 3,0 3,0 3,0 3,0 4,0
Efficiency 30,0% 1,0 1,0 1,0 1,0 1,0 1,0 0,8 1,2
Flexibility 6,5% 3,0 4,0 4,0 3,0 3,0 4,0 3,0 3,0
Manageability 6,5% 3,0 4,0 4,0 3,0 4,0 3,0 3,0 3,0
Portability 7,0% 3,0 3,0 4,0 2,0 3,0 2,0 3,0 3,0
Mantainability and Management 20,0% 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,5 0,7 0,6 0,6 0,6
Interoperability 10,0% 4,0 4,0 4,0 4,0 4,0 4,0 4,0 4,0
Use of standards 10,0% 4,0 3,0 4,0 3,0 4,0 3,0 4,0 2,0
Stability and evolutivity 20,0% 0,8 0,7 0,8 0,7 0,8 0,7 0,8 0,6
Support for Security 10,0% 3,0 4,0 4,0 2,0 4,0 4,0 3,0 2,0
Security 10,0% 0,3 0,4 0,4 0,2 0,4 0,4 0,3 0,2
Percentage check 100,0%
3,3 3,4 3,4 2,9 3,2 3,2 3,0 3,4
Availab ility of IDE 35,0% 2,0 3,0 4,0 4,0 2,0 2,0 1,0 3,0
Technical knowledge available at partner 25,0% 3,0 2,0 4,0 4,0 1,0 2,0 1,0 3,0
COTS s election 40,0% 2,0 3,0 4,0 4,0 2,0 3,0 3,0 1,0
Percentage check 100,0%
2,3 2,8 4,0 4,0 1,8 2,4 1,8 2,2
2,8 3,1 3,7 3,4 2,5 2,8 2,4 2,8
SWIM
Criteria
SWIM
SUIT
Criteria
Score
SWIM Criteria Score
Average of SWIM & SWIM-SUIT Criteria
Publish/Subscribe
SWIM-SUIT Criteria Score
Request/Reply
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
20/38
Why this technologies Matrix is useful, but there is not clear
winner technology (most could work)
A mix of pragmatic reasons (see 3 last
criteria) plus research interest has
influenced to choose:
Web Services (request/reply)
DDS (publish/subscribe)
JMS (publish subscribe)
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
21/38
For request/reply pattern:
Web services (J2EE) and ESBReq/Rep have been consideredsubstantially equivalent for theSWIM criteria
For the prototypeimplementation a betterknowledge by the partnersleads to Web Service selection.
For publish/subscribe pattern:
DDS has been considered moresuitable with respect toefficiency, network performancegroup criteria (better QoS
support, scalability ) For the prototype
implementation a betteravailability of IDE integrationand maturity of technology leadsto experiment both JMS then
DDS. One of the objectives of the
SWIM-SUIT is to demonstratetechnology independence of thesolution
Why this technologies
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
22/38
Why 2 technologies for publishsubscribe One of the objectives of the SWIM-SUIT is
to demonstrate technology independence
of the solution
We plan to run the publish/subscribe
scenarios with any of the two
technologies:
DDS
JMS
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
23/38
SWIM-SUITICOG Tecnology Selection
13/05/2008 WP2.4 Meeting, Bruxelles
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
24/38
Technology candidates CORBA OMG Data Distribution Service (DDS)
Web services
JMS compliant MOM
Distributed database
FTP
15/05/2008 AP4 Meeting, Bruxelles
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
25/38
Introduction Technology decisions Several technology decision:
Technology for describing the payload
Technology for providing request/reply pattern
Technology for providing publish/subscribe pattern
For FO and ENV data
15/05/2008 AP4 Meeting, Bruxelles
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
26/38
Selection criteria - TechnicalCapability Support Request/Reply
That feature measures the availability to support
the service/response pattern
Support publish/subscribe That feature measures the availability of a datadistribution (one to many) service in the technology
WAN failure recovery
That feature measures the ability of the technologyto provide backup strategies in case of WAN
failure
15/05/2008 AP4 Meeting, Bruxelles
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
27/38
Selection criteria - Performances Performances on WAN request/reply
This criterion measures the behaviour of the technologywhen processing a service request through a wide areanetwork. This behaviour is measured regarding its latencytimes, capacity figures, response times
Performances on WAN pub/sub This criterion measures the behaviour of the technology
when publishing or subscribing to events through a wide areanetwork. This behaviour is measured regarding its latencytimes, capacity figures, response times
Multi-cast This criterion determines if the technology allows messagesdistribution by the IP multicast protocol
15/05/2008 AP4 Meeting, Bruxelles
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
28/38
Selection criteria - Portability &evolutivity (1/2) Multi-OS supported
This criterion measures the ability of the technology to be
implemented over different operative systems
Multi-language supported
This criterion measures the range of programming languagesthat can implement the technology
Multi-versioning/extensibility
This criterion measures the ability of the technology to face
multiples IOP interfaces at the same time and also the
capability to support the increments in the number of IOP
stakeholders and their interfaces
15/05/2008 AP4 Meeting, Bruxelles
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
29/38
Selection criteria - Portability &evolutivity (2/2) Standardized multi-source solution and protocol
interoperability
That feature measures whether or not all the actors must use
a unique solution. A standard based solution provided by
several vendors is preferable. It evaluates, in case the
technology requires third party vendors, the availability of
several sources
Evolutivity of infrastructure
This criterion measures the ability of the technology to be
adapted or keeping on working upon potential infrastructurechanges
15/05/2008 AP4 Meeting, Bruxelles
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
30/38
Selection criteria - Security Security (authentication)
This criterion measures the capability of the
technology to provide an efficient method for
identifying the users of the IOP network
Data Security (encryption)
This criterion measures the capability of the
technology to provide a method of data encryption
that avoids non-authorized users to decrypt and
understand the data being transferred
15/05/2008 AP4 Meeting, Bruxelles
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
31/38
Selection criteria - Cost related Cost to purchase
That criterion evaluates the relative cost to acquire
development and/or runtime licences in case the
technology requires a COTS with charge
Administration & maintenance This criterion measures the technology-derived
cost related to administration, deployment and
maintenance operations or even IOP functionality
or capabilities upgrade
15/05/2008 AP4 Meeting, Bruxelles
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
32/38
Selection criteria - IT marketrelated Maturity
This criterion is used to evaluate the grade of the
confidence that the technology has acquired
through its use in other successful projects and the
grade of standardization that it has reached Forecasted market impact
This criterion is used to evaluate the expected
level of use of the technology in the Information
Technology (IT) market in the coming years. Thiscriterion is defined to reflect how emerging
technologies that may not be very widely adopted
today might pick-up as the solution of tomorrow
15/05/2008 AP4 Meeting, Bruxelles
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
33/38
Selection criteria Programmatic Consistency with CoFlight/iTEC
middleware
That criterion evaluates the suitability of the
IOP middleware with regards to the internalsystem middleware
15/05/2008 AP4 Meeting, Bruxelles
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
34/38
Analysis Web Services XML(Req./Rep.) The W3C defines a Web service as a software system designed to
support interoperable Machine to Machine interaction over a network. Web Services provide a standard means of interoperating between
different software applications, running on a variety of platforms and/orframeworks
Great interoperability and extensibility
Natively based on XML
Can be combined in a loosely coupled way in order to achievecomplex operations
Thanks to SOAP protocol,platform independent
Language independent
Extensible
15/05/2008 AP4 Meeting, Bruxelles
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
35/38
Analysis DDS XML (Pub./Sub.) Data-centric communication model assures efficientdata distribution, with robust and highly configurable
capabilities
Rich set of QoS:
Durability, Reliability, Timeliness, Partition, Ownership,
Resource_limits
Interoperability between vendors assured by RTPS Wire
Protocol
DDS is widely considered as the future technology for data
distribution over large distributed networks with a large market
impact.
Use of XML payload strategy overcome multi-versioning and interface evolution issues that arepresent using IDL
15/05/2008 AP4 Meeting, Bruxelles
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
36/38
Benchmarking resultsCriteria Weight
DDS
IDL
DDS
XML
JMS
compliant
MOM
CORBA
notifica.
IDL
CORBA
notifica.
XML
Distribute
d
database
CORBA
IDL
CORBA
XML
Web Services
over HTTP
Technical Capability 10%Support Data Distribution 5,0% 5 5 3 3 3 0 0 0
Support Request 5,0% 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 5
WAN failure recovery 5,0% 5 5 2 2 2 4 4 4
Perfos 15%Performances on WAN request/reply 15,0% 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 3
Performances on WAN pub/sub 7,5% 5 4 3 3 2 0 0 0
Multi-cast 7,5% 5 5 3 1 1 0 0 0
Portability & evolutivity 30%Multi-OS suppported 2,5% 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 5
Muti-language supported 2,5% 4 4 2 5 5 5 5 4Multiversionning/extensibility 10,0% 2 4 4 2 4 2 4 4
Standardized multi-source solution 10,0% 3 3 2 4 4 4 4 5
Evolutivity of infrastructure 5,0% 5 5 4 5 5 5 5 5
Security 10%Security (authentication) 5,0% 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3
Data Security (encryption) 5,0% 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3
Cost related 15%
Cost to purchase 7,5% 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 5
Administration & maintenance 7,5% 4 4 2 3 3 4 4 4
IT market related 15%Maturity 7,5% 2 2 3 5 5 5 5 5
Forecasted market impact 7,5% 3 4 4 2 2 2 2 5
Programmatic 5%Consistency with CoFlight/Itec
middleware5,0%
5 5 3 5 5 5 5 3
Check 100%
Result 353 373 310 325 338 0 390 395 415
Ranking 2 1 5 4 3 6 3 2 1
Request/ReplyPublish/Subscribe
15/05/2008 AP4 Meeting, Bruxelles
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
37/38
Conclusions FO Distribution and Dynamic ENV data
XML on DDS thus combining the flexibility and evolutivity features ofXML together with performance and reliability features of DDS
FO Request Web Services considered as a more forward-looking solution by the
ATM community
XML on DDS
Static ENV Data AIXM on JMS (SonicMQ) (adopting already existing solutions??)
15/05/2008 AP4 Meeting, Bruxelles
-
7/27/2019 4.1 SWIM-SUIT & ICOG Technology Selection
38/38
Thanks