1. Dev 328.NET & J2EE Strategies for Interoperability David Aiken Lead Enterprise Architect

2. Agenda Motivation Integration Scenarios Integration Technologies Complex Data Integration Architecture Taking it Further

3. Agenda Motivation Integration Scenarios Integration Technologies Complex Data Integration Architecture Taking it Further

4. Motivation J2EE/Java applications exist Migration is not an “Overnight” process Design for Interoperability Re-use legacy systems Replacement (phased) Pilot for adoption Cost savings for developer Resources

5. Agenda Motivation Integration Scenarios Integration Technologies Complex Data Integration Architecture Taking it Further

6. Interoperability Scenarios Technology Map J2EE.NET ASP.NET Serviced Components JSP/Struts Servlets EJB’s Database Message Queue Broker

7. Interoperability Scenarios Presentation Tier J2EE.NET ASP.NET Serviced Components JSP/Struts Servlets EJB’s Database Message Queue Broker

8. Interoperability Scenarios Business Tier J2EE.NET ASP.NET Serviced Components JSP/Struts Servlets EJB’s Database Message Queue Broker

9. Interoperability Scenarios Shared Resources J2EE.NET ASP.NET Serviced Components JSP/Struts Servlets EJB’s Database Message Queue Broker

10. Agenda Motivation Integration Scenarios Integration Technologies Complex Data Integration Architecture Taking it Further

11. Integration Technologies Wire Level Message Queues Web Services

12. Integration Technologies Wire Level Products Ja.NET (Intrinsyc), JNBridge Pro (JNBridge) Advantages Wire Level, Binary Performance Keep Alive Disadvantages Tightly Coupled Interface Vendor Specific

13. Integration Technologies Message Queues Products MSMQ, IBM WebSphere MQ Host Integration Server 2000, BizTalk Server 2002 Advantages Loosely Coupled, N to N Scenarios, SOA Transactions, Security, RM Disadvantages Synchronous Operation is Limited Possible Port / Firewall Issues Message Queue between Organizations?

14. Integration Technologies Web Services – The way forward! Products Standards-based SOAP stacks MS ASP.NET Apache Axis, Glue etc. Advantages Leverage component architectures & design patterns Facilitate service-orientation Loosely Coupled Disadvantages Verbose

15. Agenda Motivation Integration Scenarios Integration Technologies Complex Data Integration Architecture Taking it Further

16. Complex Data Integration Challenge.NET and Java Data Types do NOT map.net DataSet = ???? Java Vector = ???? We like to work with Native Objects DataSets, Collections, etc.

17. Complex Data Integration Challenge - Facts Thoughts: We Should be Thinking Service We Should be Thinking Multiplatform We Should NOT be Thinking RPC’s i.e. Method Calls We are Exchanging Messages XML is our Data Format XSD Should Define Message Structure

18. Complex Data Integration Technology Factors Wire Creates proxies of data types Proxies Not Platform Friendly (e.g. No Data Binding) Message Queues Already exchange messages! Need a common format Web Services Should be exchanging messages! WSDL differences RPC vs. document style interfaces Not Platform Friendly (e.g. No Data Binding)

19. Complex Data Integration Solution Exchange Messages as XML Return XML Return String containing XML All Platforms Understand String All Platforms can Parse XML After all its just text! Structure Defined Using XSD Loosely Coupled Supports Versioning!

20. Complex Data Key Lesson XSD (Data Transfer Objects) Programming model independent XSD (DTO) ™ J2EE™ DOM JAXM Custom Serializer Vendor Tools ™.NET™ Typed DataSet Xml Serialization Namespace

21. Web Services Complex Data Types David Aiken Lead Enterprise Architect demo demo

22. Agenda Motivation Integration Scenarios Integration Technologies Complex Data Integration Architecture Taking it Further

23. Integration Architecture Design Goals Capture Use Case in Code Allow Interoperability to Change Change Integration without breaking code Use Best Practices XBikes Sample Application Based on Downhill Bikes Several Flavours.net, J2EE IBM WebSphere JBoss, WebLogic soon!

24. Use Case Model Collaboration Diagram Object Sequence Diagram GUI Prototype Domain Model Class Model Dynamic Static Designing for Integration Code

25. Design Patterns Command Encapsulate a request as an object, thereby letting you parameterize clients with different requests, queue or log requests, and support undoable operations. Adapter Convert the interface of a class into another interface clients expect. Adapter lets classes work together that couldn't otherwise because of incompatible interfaces Factory Provide an interface for creating families of related or dependent objects without specifying their concrete classes.

26. PresentationBusiness LogicData XBikes Execution.NET.NET J2EE SQL Use Case Factory Config.xml Command Adapters Client Use Case Adapter IUseCase uc = Factory.GetUseCase(“XXXX”); DataSet dto = uc.execute(); WS Wire MQ WS Wire MQ Biz Serviced Components DAL ADO.NET Biz Session Beans DAL Entity Beans Service Façade

27. Integration – XBikes Architecture David Aiken Lead Enterprise Architect demo demo

28. Integration – XBikes Web Services David Aiken Lead Enterprise Architect demo demo

29. Agenda Motivation Integration Scenarios Integration Technologies Complex Data Integration Architecture Taking it Further

30. Orchestration XML Web Services Standards Architecture

31. Orchestration layer (BizTalk) Business LogicData Presentation DTO.ASPX Code Behind.ASPX BizTalk Multipoint Orchestration Orchestration Layer BizTalk WS Adapter MSMQ (Asych Adapter) (Asych Adapter) J2EE JDBC ADO. NET.NET XML WS UC Adapter OTHER (NOT XML WS)

32. Web Service Standards Web Services Interoperability Organisation Safe subset of SOAP / WSDL etc. http://www.ws-i.org/ Basic Profile (Draft) 1.0 Usage Scenarios Some testing tools Follow specification for higher success

33. XML Web Services Standards Architecture (WS interop platform) SOAP HTTP/SMTPXMLTCP/IP Directory Inspection SOAP Modules SOAPProtocols Referral Routing Security License EventingTransactions Queuing The Internet … …Description …… … Discovery Application Infrastructure Basic

34. Web Services Standards Microsoft (WSE) IBM (WSTK) ™ J2EE™ APPLICATION SERVER ™ WINDOWS™ IIS / COM+

35. Recommendations Look out for the Microsoft Patterns & Practices Guide – Coming Soon! Download DHB/XBikes demo apps to understand J2EE &.NET interop issues http://www.dotnetland.co.uk http://www.dotnetland.co.uk

36. DHB / XBikes Integration Reloaded David Aiken Lead Enterprise Architect demo demo

37. Summary Design Integration at the use case level Select technology Default = Web Services Data Think XML Use Factory / Adapter Pattern to protect code from changes Remember Loosely Coupled, Message Based, Use-case Driven Architecture

38. Ask The Experts Get Your Questions Answered Thursday 9-11am

39. Community Resources http://www.microsoft.com/communities/default.mspx Most Valuable Professional (MVP) http://www.mvp.support.microsoft.com/ Newsgroups Converse online with Microsoft Newsgroups, including Worldwide http://www.microsoft.com/communities/newsgroups/default.mspx User Groups Meet and learn with your peers http://www.microsoft.com/communities/usergroups/default.mspx

40. evaluations evaluations

41. © 2003 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. This presentation is for informational purposes only. MICROSOFT MAKES NO WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, IN THIS SUMMARY.