1. This Presentation Courtesy of the
International SOA Symposium
October 7-8, 2008 Amsterdam Arena
www.soasymposium.com
info@soasymposium.com
Founding Sponsors
Platinum Sponsors
Gold Sponsors Silver Sponsors
Avoiding SOA Pitfalls
Radovan Janecek
Chief Architect, BTO, HP Software
June 2008
© 2008 Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P.
The information contained herein is subject to change without notice
1 October 2003 Copyright © 2006 HP corporate presentation. All rights reserved.

2. Eight Years of SOA Wins and Mistakes
• Co-founded Systinet (2000)
− Web Services stacks in C++ and Java
− Service Registry
− SOA Governance
• Led SOA Center in Mercury/HP (2006)
− SOA Governance, Quality, Management
• BTO Architecture (2008)
− Service and Data Models
− Integration strategy (SOA based)
To Remember
• SOA is GOOD as it SIMPLIFIES big initiatives
− Business Service Management
− Business Service Automation
− Service Portfolio Management
• Beware of Snake-Oil Architecture
− The more EAI the worse SOA
• SOA Governance is a must
4 21 October 2008
2 October 2003 Copyright © 2006 HP corporate presentation. All rights reserved.

3. BTO Blueprint
BUSINESS STRATEGY BUSINESS BUSINESS OPERATIONS
IT STRATEGY IT APPLICATIONS Applicatio
IT OPERATIONS ITIL Service
CIO/Biz/IT n Support Desk
Strategic Steering Portfolio and Business Business
Financial Quality Management Tests - Monitors IT Service
Committee CAB Service Management
Demand Management Management
• Project Manage QA SLAs and
Manage Verify Manage business Manage service
proposals enterprise projects and Ensure incidents
• New portfolio Manage functional Validate transaction and lifecycle
programs application end-user experience
applications business quality security performance
Resource Continually
• New services requirements Automate Manage composite improve services
constrained Control and Diagnose
• New portfolio enforcement test Vulnerability applications
architectures optimization Manage planning, assessments performance and SOA services Federated Manage assets,
execution for problems CMDB improve service
PMO quality Isolation, Business cost efficiency
requirements development, triage impact
Analysis QA and Tune
Service Discovery Self service
of defects production environment Manage
portfolio repository + mapping capabilities
infrastructure
domains, events
Change
CTO Office ASSEMBLE and services Operations RFCs
DESIGN impact
and
/BUILD Change CAB and
Manage SOA NOC incidents
collisions
notification
portfolio Development
Publish services SOA Operations Orchestration
and manage repository
consumption New projects Quality Defects Remediation Business Service
and management and Automation
Operational enhancements repository issues
Automate configuration and change
Demand (client, server, network, storage)
• Defects Compliance . Manage IT compliance and audit
• Enhancements / Security Provision and scale
• Operational Baseline environment
change requests
• Service catalog
• Knowledge mgmt.
5 21 October 2008
LET’S TALK ABOUT PITFALLS
6 21 October 2008
3 October 2003 Copyright © 2006 HP corporate presentation. All rights reserved.

4. Agenda
In scope Out of scope
• Organization • Performance
• Solutions vs Integrations • Security
• SOA vs EAI • Language binding
• Point-to-Point vs HUB • Testing
• Common Data Model
• API granularity
• Standards
7 21 October 2008
Organization
• Project driven SOA
− Perhaps good validation in small scope
• SOA Governance
− Lack of
− Too ambitious
• Only technical view
− “It‟s a software architecture” view
8 21 October 2008
4 October 2003 Copyright © 2006 HP corporate presentation. All rights reserved.

5. #1: Project-driven SOA
• SOA is implemented within specific project(s)
• Good
− Validation of the concept
− Starting point
• Bad
− Silo reinforcement
− No proof it will work across silos
• Reasons
− Alignment with business, Commitment, Experience
− Financial: funding, incentives
− Trust!
9 21 October 2008
#1: Suggestion
• Align with business on the importance
− Cross-portfolio (silo) integrated solutions
− Identify the most critical solutions (not services!)
Funding Model, Commitments
• Define SOA Governance model
Trust, Experience, Alignment
10 21 October 2008
5 October 2003 Copyright © 2006 HP corporate presentation. All rights reserved.

6. #2: SOA Governance
• No or wrong governance practices
• Good
− You can move faster short-term
• Bad
− JBOWS, poor execution
• Reasons
− Project scope (hard to find ROI)
− Technical view (we already have technical governance!)
− Too ambitious model inherited from project experience
11 21 October 2008
#2: Suggestion (part 1)
• Create centralized R&D counterpart to business for
strategic decisions
• Create SOA Center that
− Defines processes, best practices, compliance guidelines
− Selects appropriate standards
− Executes the governance processes
− Centralizes Service and Data models creation efforts
Expertise, Communication
12 21 October 2008
6 October 2003 Copyright © 2006 HP corporate presentation. All rights reserved.

7. #2: Suggestion (part 2)
• May centralize Solution Testing and Certification
• Keep development decentralized
− Creation of centralized “integration team” reinforces
“somebody-else‟s-problem” behavior
• VISIBILITY
− Everything online: plans, compliance reports, experience
sharing, service rating, catalogs, blueprints
Pragmatic Execution Model
13 21 October 2008
#3: Technical View
• SOA seen as software development detail
• Good
− Focus on technical excellence
• Bad
− #1, #2
− Over-engineered architecture
− Focus on HOW instead of WHAT
• Reasons
− SOA is driven mainly by architects
− Software creation doesn‟t matter anyway
14 21 October 2008
7 October 2003 Copyright © 2006 HP corporate presentation. All rights reserved.

8. #3: Suggestion
Start with #1!
15 21 October 2008
#4: Solutions vs Integrations
• Building integrations without higher-level view
− Let‟s move customer entry from here over there
• Good
− Integration is done fast
• Bad
− Too many integrations are not reusable
− Hard to identify and remove functional overlaps
− Service and Data model cannot be reasonably created
• Reasons
− EAI habits, #1 (project-driven soa)
16 21 October 2008
8 October 2003 Copyright © 2006 HP corporate presentation. All rights reserved.

9. Example: Change Management Solution
• End-to-end
− From discovering a reason for change
− Thru planning, approvals, and execution
− To verifying the effect of the change
− Multiple reasons for change, multiple workflows/processes
One of multiple scenarios by BTO
Nice and simple ITIL
17 21 October 2008
#4: Suggestion
Start with #1!
18 21 October 2008
9 October 2003 Copyright © 2006 HP corporate presentation. All rights reserved.

10. #5: SOA vs EAI
• EAIin angle brackets
• One of the top SOA failure reasons
• Good
− Leveraging EAI tools and skills
• Bad
− Everything
• Reasons
− #1, #2, #3, #4
19 21 October 2008
More on SOA vs EAI
EAI SOA
a b
c e
d
20 21 October 2008
10 October 2003 Copyright © 2006 HP corporate presentation. All rights reserved.

11. BTO Blueprint
BUSINESS STRATEGY BUSINESS BUSINESS OPERATIONS
IT STRATEGY IT APPLICATIONS Applicatio
IT OPERATIONS ITIL Service
CIO/Biz/IT n Support Desk
Strategic Steering Portfolio and Business Business
Financial Quality Management Tests - Monitors IT Service
Committee CAB Service Management
Demand Management Management
• Project Manage QA SLAs and
Manage Verify Manage business Manage service
proposals enterprise projects and Ensure incidents
• New portfolio Manage functional Validate transaction and lifecycle
programs application end-user experience
applications business quality security performance
Resource Continually
• New services requirements Automate Manage composite improve services
constrained Control and Diagnose
• New portfolio enforcement test Vulnerability applications
architectures optimization Manage planning, assessments performance and SOA services Federated Manage assets,
execution for problems CMDB improve service
PMO quality Isolation, Business cost efficiency
requirements development, triage impact
Analysis QA and Tune
Service Discovery Self service
of defects production environment Manage
portfolio repository + mapping capabilities
infrastructure
domains, events
Change
CTO Office ASSEMBLE and services Operations RFCs
DESIGN impact
and
/BUILD Change CAB and
Manage SOA NOC incidents
collisions
notification
portfolio Development
Publish services SOA Operations Orchestration
and manage repository
consumption New projects Quality Defects Remediation Business Service
and management and Automation
Operational enhancements repository issues
Automate configuration and change
Demand (client, server, network, storage)
• Defects Compliance . Manage IT compliance and audit
• Enhancements / Security Provision and scale
• Operational Baseline environment
change requests
• Service catalog
• Knowledge mgmt.
21 21 October 2008
#5: Suggestions
• Observe warning signs
− “Let‟s put these two onto the same database”
− “We need distributed transactions here”
−…
• Be SOA fundamentalist until tightly coupled
scenario is needed
Understanding of SOA vs EAI
22 21 October 2008
11 October 2003 Copyright © 2006 HP corporate presentation. All rights reserved.

12. #6: HUB Better Than Point-to-Point
23 21 October 2008
#6: HUB Better Than Point-to-Point
24 21 October 2008
12 October 2003 Copyright © 2006 HP corporate presentation. All rights reserved.

13. #6: HUB Better Than Point-to-Point
• Nothing wrong on P2P if Governance is in place
• HUB will not help if Governance is missing
• Advantages hypothetical
− Real dependencies are not that complex
• Disadvantages are real
− Deployment cost, integration cost (multiple HUBs), evolution
issues (multiple places to change)
• HUB de-facto implements additional business logic
− E.g. content based routing, orchestration, etc.
− Who owns it? What about contracts?
− Why is this logic not provided by a service?
25 21 October 2008
#6: Suggestion
• SOA: Service, Consumer, Contract – no HUB
• Use Service Registry for late binding
• Strictly use middleware-type HUBs behind
service‟s façade
• Do contract management (even very simple one
helps)
Time saving, Right focus, Success
26 21 October 2008
13 October 2003 Copyright © 2006 HP corporate presentation. All rights reserved.

14. #7: Common Data Model
• False: Strict CDM is a must for SOA success
• Good
− Common vocabulary and shared data structures help
• Bad
− Slows down too much
− Questionable ROI
• Reasons
− EAI thinking not realizing SOA has bigger scope
27 21 October 2008
#7: Suggestion
• Align on key business taxonomies
• Define data model guidelines
− Standards, metadata, evolution, customizations
• Identifykey use cases (solutions) and key services
• Allow for relaxed semantics across them
• Again: model is driven by contract
Data Model will grow with your SOA
28 21 October 2008
14 October 2003 Copyright © 2006 HP corporate presentation. All rights reserved.

15. #7: Suggestion Visual
Configuration Management
Other
Related
CMS
Core
29 21 October 2008
#7: Suggestion Visual
30 21 October 2008
15 October 2003 Copyright © 2006 HP corporate presentation. All rights reserved.

16. #8: API Granularity
• Services provide rich „chatty‟ interfaces
• Good
− Fast legacy API re-use
• Bad
− Tight coupling
− Exploding complexity
• Reasons
− Services treated as components
− Low control over 3rd party software
31 21 October 2008
#8: Suggestion
• Refactor existing API
− Consider REST
• Move as much business logic to the endpoints as
possible
Less features, More reliability
32 21 October 2008
16 October 2003 Copyright © 2006 HP corporate presentation. All rights reserved.

17. #8: Suggestion Visual: Create Incident
Event Source Incident Manager
lookup
? create
update
submit lookup
BPEL
? create
update
submit
subscribe ?
33 21 October 2008
#9: Standards
• Standards are not enough!
− Generic envelopes
− Industry standards often „tailored‟ when used
• Data externalization rules
− Mapping to standards
• Dates, Versions, References, MIME types, etc.
− Identification
− Cross references (hyperlinks?)
• Businessvocabulary and taxonomies
• Look carefully at adoption outside of your company
34 21 October 2008
17 October 2003 Copyright © 2006 HP corporate presentation. All rights reserved.

18. Summarizing…
• SOA is more about good methodology and
process rather than technology
− More guidelines than middlewares
− More communication than features
• Beware of pitfalls
− Most of them come from „legacy thinking‟
• Governance is key as we are working on „global‟
level
35 21 October 2008
Q&A
THANK YOU
36 21 October 2008
18 October 2003 Copyright © 2006 HP corporate presentation. All rights reserved.