Tim Bauer’s Running Thoughts

Semi-daily webcast summaries/insights

MSFT and WSS 3.0

Watched this webcast

LINK


today around WSS 3.0 due to our project w/ a client in Milwaukee kicking off. Goal is to base thier lead management system on the WSS infrastructure. Key question being do we need 3.0 or not. After watching this I would say yes. Outside of that tactical info … here were the keys I saw:

    1. Sharepoint 2007 as Framework. It was interesting to see them begin to demo how a SP server could become the piece of framework for ALL custom applications … especially basic ones for data management, content management, collaboration functions, etc. Database and code generated on the fly.

    2. Many ECM issues solved. In this release, if all is true I would agree that SP 2007 becomes a viable platform for doing medium level ECM tasks (viable for middle market). Issues like global meta models (via content types), cross site searching, have been solved.

    3. Alot of good reasons for upgrade to WSS 3.0. See details below but things like enforced check out option, or versioning models, are key.

I would recommend this one to all our dev team. While a bit long in the the tooth (1:20) clearly is an enabler for all your work. Here are the rough notes.

Quote:
Agenda
………….○ DataStore
………….○ Content Management
………….○ APIs
………….○ Pages / User Intfcs
………….○ Provisioning
• Developer Map (PDF) http://msdn.microsoft.com/office/server/moss/
• 5:00 - Site Model
………….○ SPFarm
………….○ SPWEbApplications
……………………..§ SPSIte
…………………………………□ SPList
…………………………………………….¨ SPListItem
…………………………………□ SPFolders
…………………………………………….¨ SPFile
………….○ Forms a security boundry (SPsite)
………….○ Limited to 1 DB
• 10:30 - Can move sites around SPWebs around (list views to sub spwebs)
• 12:00 - Sample Hierarchy
………….○ SPWeb
……………………..§ SPWeb - Portal
……………………..§ SPWeb - Blog
……………………..§ SPWeb - TeamSite
…………………………………□ SPWeb - TeamSite
………….○ Again the key of SPSites being the physical delimiter (can’t move across boxes or share.. So plan accordingly)
• 16:00 - Infrastructure Improvements
………….○ Old - Can hit Sharepoint via WebDAV
………….○ Two Stage Recycle
………….○ Folders in Lists
………….○ Cross List Query
………….○ Folders in Lists gives you the meta on documents. In WSS 3.0. Integrate lists and doc libs. For example discussion boards posts are folders and replies are items in the folders. Provides performance gains.
………….○ Cross List. The single index on SPWeb. Also can index specific columns on a list field.
• 19:00 - Lists and Librarires
………….○ New features in 3.0 -
……………………..§ Append only (cant change … only append comments)
……………………..§ Multi - value lookups
……………………..§ Custom field types
………….○ So this is infra supporting models earlier provided that didn’t work. A central list store that is shared out in various areas. Meta on columns on the field. ECM lite.
………….○ Can have fields in one list lookup values in another list (tie em together)
• 25:00 - Security
………….○ Cross site groups
………….○ List level security
………….○ Web level security
………….○ New in 3.0
……………………..§ Item level security
……………………..§ Web application policy
……………………..§ Permission levels (site groups are deprecated)
……………………..§ ASP.NET authentication
• 27:00 - Demo WSS 3.0
………….○ Key template sites basically make Sharepoint a framework generation (w/ hosted enterprise backing) for key functions of apps … ecm, forums, wiki, blogs, shared tables, content, etc.
………….○ Shows forms. Can be customized. Get em default. Shows how one form can pick valid values and data from another list.
• 35:00 - Content Management in WSS 3.0
………….○ Workflow (WWF)
………….○ Forms (use ASPX for forms)
……………………..§ Via Infopath you can work w/ forms in word or excel
………….○ Use VS or SP Designer to design workflows
• 37:00 - Libraries
………….○ Check in / Check Out (enhanced)
……………………..§ Required check out an option now
………….○ Required properties (blocks upload )
………….○ Versioning
……………………..§ Major / Minor versions
……………………..§ Allow readers to see up to one level while the same doc place can have versions beyond that for authors to work
……………………..§ Trimming allowed (only track X versiosn)
……………………..§ Available on lists
………….○ Schema Management
……………………..§ So another issue resolved (global ECM model). Schema Management. Change in one place and push down.
……………………..§ Content type (enforces a well known meta structure as a base for that content type).
…………………………………□ Assoc behaviors (events, templates, workflows)
…………………………………□ Multiple content types per list
……………………..§ Column templates (centralized field management)
………….○ Object Model and Web Services
……………………..§ Sharepoint List
……………………..§ New
…………………………………□ Property Bags
…………………………………□ Impersonation and Elevation
…………………………………□ System updates
…………………………………□ SPContext (use this in WebPages)
…………………………………□ SPUtility
…………………………………□ Extensible admin objects
………….○ 46:00 Events
……………………..§ Post Asynch Events for Libraries
…………………………………□ Events at item level
…………………………………□ (much more power here)
………….○ 50:00 - APS.NET integration w/ WSS
……………………..§ Better than 2.0 (integrates more directly)
……………………..§ Pages
…………………………………□ Master Page Arch
…………………………………………….¨ One page that can be overriden by the child pages
…………………………………□ Stored in file system and DB
……………………..§ Master Page Tokens
…………………………………□ Two Dynamic Tokens
…………………………………………….¨ So you change on page and they all pick it up
…………………………………□ Two Static Tokens
………….○ 54:00 - Web Parts
……………………..§ New in v3 — UI for Webparts
……………………..§ ASPX allows usage of user controls (which doesn’t work in WSS v3).
………….○ 58:00 - Provisioning
……………………..§ Site Definition (defines site). XML.
……………………..§ Site Templates (defines templates).
……………………..§ In v3
…………………………………□ Refactored to concept of ‘features’ … single component of doc libs for example. As build site definition all sites pull from the master (versus being embedded into each)
………….○ 1:00 - Solution Deployment
……………………..§ CAB up and hand to admin
………….○ 1:01 - Demo - User Interface Lightup
……………………..§ Define a number of custom actions
……………………..§ Bring custom features to sharepoint directory … then you need to register them ..
……………………..§ Activate feature in specfic feature
……………………..§ (all batch commands)
………….○ 1:05 - Summary of what was covered
………….○ 1:06 - Q&A
……………………..§ More info on other products like CRM?
…………………………………□ Part of functionality … so not really something you need to worry about unless you are using it.
……………………..§ Does SP 2007 replace CMS?
…………………………………□ Now there is wss3.0 and sp 2007. So yes sp2007 does replace cms.
……………………..§ Example of ASP.NET auth in SP?
…………………………………□ No great example. Google shows some random non-MSFT MVPs.
……………………..§ Wiki is a site w/ a doc lib?
…………………………………□ Yes, you can inside teamsite create a wiki site. Better default nav that way. Or use as a lib.
……………………..§ WSS 3.0 works on?
…………………………………□ SQL Server. No files.
……………………..§ WWF has to be installed for WSS 3.0 to work?
…………………………………□ Yes
……………………..§ Does schema management affect the document? Ie a priority field in the doc?
…………………………………□ Yes from the document to the list … works … then if it changes in the list … it will change the word doc. Impressive.
……………………..§ 1:19 - Ghosting?
…………………………………□ Yes still exists. Rather use master pages.
……………………..§ Good site for complex sites examples?
…………………………………□ Look @ SP SDK
……………………..§ Go live license for WSS 3.0?
…………………………………□ Not right now
……………………..§ Need windows 2003 for development.

July 18, 2006 Posted by bauertim | Uncategorized | , | No Comments

MSFT: UX via Expression

I noticed an early webcast on the Expression line coming out of MSFT in 2007. For those not aware it is a set of 3 products they are positioning to enable Designers and Developers to finally work in the same toolset and base framework (XAML, etc) … versus seperate ones today (ie Photoshop and VS 2005).

After watching it … i would say its only for the die hards of UX since it was rather mundane … but quick in 1.4 speed (20 minutes). It was so mundane I don’t really have notables about it. Imagine that. My raw notes are below.

Keep in mind, we need to track this (and other tools like it) in order to continue to build our UX message. We are in the right position at this time (UX compentency building in advance of notable marketing coming from MSFT on that front w/ the Vista and 2007 set release). What we need to hone is the compelling reason to bring in support by our clients. Championing this tool line might be one.

Quote:
• Jon Byrum - Expression Product Mgr (7/14/06(
• Agenda
……………○ UX
……………○ .NET 3.0 - WPF
……………○ Dev / Designer collab via xaml
• 1:30 - Example of UX
• 4:30 - Discussions of richest experience for UX via applications that leverage the client (not just browser)
• 5:45 - .NET 3.0 (basis of UX)
……………○ WPF <– Key
……………○ WWF
……………○ Info Card (card space)
……………○ WCF - web services
• 7:00 - XPF Details
• 8:00 - Examples
……………○ MSFT MAX (WPF Example)
……………○ Health care demo (live monitors, overlayed)
…………………………§ Drag drop charts to aggregate charts
……………○ Northface prototype (kiosk)
…………………………§ Video to product swapping (contextual usage sales & click through)
• 13:00 - UX and Coder Collaboration
……………○ XAML allows both users (ui designer and dev) to be in same tool
……………○ Mock up UI rough (dev) pass to UI team (in XAML)
• 16:00 - Tools
……………○ Graphic Designer
…………………………§ Allow vector and bit net graphics
…………………………§ Allow to add dynamic effect on selection for example
……………○ Interactive Designer
…………………………§ Talk again in 2 wks (28th) with demos
……………○ Web Designer
…………………………§ Cascading style sheets
…………………………§ Supports ASP.NET tools
…………………………§ No connectivity to DB
…………………………§ XML support (so could pull real data)
• 22:00 - Next Steps
……………○ CTP - Comm Tech Preview
……………○ Review Vista, Expression, .NET 3.0, Max Photo sites
• 24:00 - Questions

July 16, 2006 Posted by bauertim | Uncategorized | , , | No Comments

Webinar: Rockwell Collins SOA Review

Watched this webcast on http://www.ebizq.net.

http://www.ebizq.net/webinars/archive.html

You have to signup but its free. Not a bad looking site for EAI/BPM/SOA research. I bookmarked it.

Anyway, I checked this out in light of ongoing conversations w/ clients around various aspects of EAI/SOA/etc. Wanted to hear what a $3.5B company had to say about it. The guy was very well spoken but drew long in the tooth towards the end. Still excellent detail discussion of how they setup thier infrastructure and why. Here are the keys I heard:

    1. No Bus (ESB) for them (not big enough). It was interesting that they choose not to leverage an ESB (Enterprise Service Bus) to start with. They felt that thier number of services (~100) didn’t warrant it.
    2. WWW –> DMZ –> FORK. Thier infra design basically boiled down to four enviroments: WWW, DMZ (app UI’s live here), PARTNER (business logic layer lives here), INTERNAL (web services live here). Prior to an SOA plan they would route service calls serially through the environments. With SOA (via an XML Gateway between the DMZ and INTERNAL) they simplified accesss and increased security. Interesting that it bypassed some of the business logic layer in the PARTNER area (I assume they redeployed that.
    3. Try again SAP They are an SAP shop (as alot of our customers are) but don’t feel that SAP’s SOA toolkit was ready to be the core of thier solution. This is interesting in that alot of our SAP customers (RA, HD, Miller, JJ Keller, etc) are looking for ways to expose SAP services out to thier org … and here is one unbaised team deciding no way (rolling thier own).

A good webcast. Two thumbs up. thumbup thumbup Detail notes below.

Quote:
• Shawn Fergason
• SOA and Security
• Rockwell Collins - Aviation Sector - Communications ($3.4B)
• 6:00 - SOA Drivers
………….○ Increasing demand for information from customers
………….○ Started w/ Portal
……………………..§ Content framework
……………………..§ Security framework
……………………..§ Single point of access
……………………..§ HOWEVER, bad reuse. Manual data interchange. This drove SOA for them.
• 11:30 - SOA Router Or Not?
………….○ Peer to Peer or not
………….○ Choose central
……………………..§ Central authority models
……………………..§ Schema validation
……………………..§ Encryption treatment
……………………..§ Single focal point for SOA calls
……………………..§ Key enabler to extend services out to partners w/o compromising security. Put in XML gateway (inspect traffic). Behind DMZ (so firewall in front of this) but infront of intranet.
• 15:45 - How Network Infra Overcomes Blindspot to XML
………….○ Layer 3-7 can’t see and act on XML
……………………..§ Firewall (no deep packet inspect, no layer 7)
……………………..§ Web App Firewall (not SOAP/XML capable)
……………………..§ Generic Reverse Proxy (way too passive - like firewall)
……………………..§ SSO - Can’t review payload traffic
……………………..§ Application SDKs - No reuse, lack flex, lack consistency in policies, not heterogenous
……………………..§
…………………………………□ Resource demanding: Auth, encrypt, decrypt, validation, sig processing, compress/decompress
…………………………………□ Cant control audit, auth, change management of svcs
• 20:00 - Implementation Constraints
………….○ Rapid implementation requirements
………….○ Application layer security
………….○ Service Protection Requirements (Denial of Service, Payload Threats, Service Theft - valid users).
………….○ Services Up 24X7, Schema validation, high availability / load balance (fail over)
• 26:00 - SCM Huge Interest in SOA
………….○ Repair process (compliance - contracts)
………….○ Supplier integration (real time delivery eta on WIP material)
• 28:00 - Infra
………….○ Before SOA Router
……………………..§ DMZ (portal UI here)
……………………..§ Partner Network zone (portal middle tier, AD)
……………………..§ Data Center (web services)
………….○ After
……………………..§ New path from DMZ to XML security gateway and Data center (bypass middle partner)
• 31:30 - Estimated Savings
………….○ 1st two projects saved $70k (2-3 months).
……………………..§ Had forecasted years for payback (10-12 services in a year was forecasted). Slow pace.
……………………..§ Found two projects that had shared services needs … lead archs, using SOA, moved to a shared service infra for both teams
……………………..§ Very hard savings (had costed out another angle)
………….○ Continue to see similar results
• 34:00 - Focusing on SCM Next
………….○ Focused on Repair Services (R&D Driven). Not demanded by SCM group. Working w/ key partner ready for system to system integration.
………….○ Order status sharing (today manual via portal)
………….○ Want to replace EDI capabilities (DSSI opp in pipeline is same thing)
• 36:00 - Recommendations
………….○ Select the pilot project to leverage (otherwise strategy stays on shelf)
………….○ Stakeholders - Business / Tech Evangelist
• Q&A
………….○ SSL Wasn’t Enough? Insufficient for them. Inspect messages and insure it matches expected schema’s and perform authority checks.
………….○ XML Gateway Policy Based? May move to re-writing (right now policy based)
………….○ Middleware done by ESB? No.
………….○ XML Gateway get pierced by DMZ intruder? No. Communication for traffic in portal is treated different (so not authorized packets get hammered out)
………….○ How decide on vendors to enable? Won’t give vendors selected. Evaluation criteria most matched technically. Really came down three things (1) price (2) key long term growth for the vendor (3) partner that would provide good support in implementation.
………….○ Any ESB products considered? No. Watching that market. Evolving. Don’t see the need right now.
………….○ Back end systems had services? Had a combination … SAP (not web services) and custom web solutions (were service enabled). Built a tier to talk w/ SAP via web services. Current version not but will that way.
………….○ SOA built around how to secure Internally? Yes demand started there for us.
………….○ SAP’s ESA model considered? No. Not mature enough. Exchange infrastructure piece is being considered. Some pieces augment what they have done. Nothing in SAP is a replacement. Spent a lot on SAP. Security issues.
………….○ Process for controlling service interface definitions? New to this so not @ 100’s. Do have a SDLC. Look at existing services in design of new systems (reuse / augment). Key concern is keeping services that were extendible (open).
………….○ Followup on versioning, how approach that? Assume you are talking about the versioning of the definitions of the schema’s. Struggling with this. Done some work checking in the policy checking stuff into the source system.
………….○ Many decision factors on gateway were looking at ways to secure message traffic (multiple msg layers, types, encrypt/decrytp, multiple auth sources ie ldap, ad, radius). Not hot on transforming message in gateway initially but became crucial. Partners can’t always produced file needs.
………….○ Utilizing web service mgmt tools? No. Looking at how manage changes in policy. Evaluating time when need is valid. Right now size isn’t there to validate instrumentation.

July 6, 2006 Posted by bauertim | Uncategorized | , , | No Comments