OEG Design for dynamic routing

Hi,
In the current OEG project, we're thinking of best usability of OEG design/development based on the following scenario:
The architecture(sychonized transaction):
request flow: CLIENT ---> OEG --> OSB
respnse flow: OSB --> OEG --> CLIENT
We have 10 OSB services define on OSB side(let's call them OSB Services), which includes:
https://OSB_host:OSB_port/getDocument
https://OSB_host:OSB_port/getDocumentList
At OEG side, we are thinking of 10 OEG service defined as the entry points to 10 OSB services(1:1 mapping between OEG services and OSB services), OEG services exposed to client, including:
https://OEG_host:OEG_port/getDocument (will be route to https://OSB_host:OSB_port/getDocument)
https://OEG_host:OEG_port/getDocumentList(will be route to https://OSB_host:OSB_port/getDocumentList)
But for the policies of processing each OEG service - actually they are much similiar, all following procedure:
1) Message decryption
2) Write log
3) Routing to OSB Service
4) Write log
So we were thinking of just develop one common policy(maybe a global policy?) for 10 OEG services, may I have the idea about HOW could I do dynamic routing to different OSB services in a common policy ?
Thanks.
Cliff

Your approach sounds right, certainly having a 1:1 mapping between virtualised service in the OEG and the OSB makes things simple.
Place the decryption and logging the global request policy
Have the WS-Filter run as normal to do XSD and routing
Place the logging of response in a global respone policy

Similar Messages

MPLS, GRE (with no IPSEC) & Dynamic Routing

Good day my friends!
Just wondering if any of you could help shed some light on how I would do something. We are switching over from a Point to Point connection between sites to an MPLS one. I have read that Multicast is not permitted across MPLS, so after terminating the MPLS circuits into our network, I created some GRE Tunnels to allow for Multicast (for Dynamic routing as well as Music on Hold)... Everything went well, other then all traffic between the sites is going over the Tunnel interfaces. I would prefer that only multicast traffic go over the GRE tunnel and all other traffic traverse the MPLS without GRE Encapsulation.
I attempted to do this by doing the following... I wrote an access list indicating Multicast source addresses, then created a route map and did a match ip address acl and set interface to tunnel. then I applied that route map to the vlan (although it doesn't give me the option for direction on the 6509 switch) that the single interface is a member of. That interface goes to the router provided by the service provider. I did the same in the other site as well (2811 router, appied to the interface). What have I done wrong so far?
We run EIGRP and I did inject the tunnel ip addresses into eigrp, after which traffic started going across it (the tunnel). I need to make sure that routing can find a path via MPLS in EIGRP outside of GRE, and for that all I have done so far is create static routes (on our 6509 and 2811 devices that the MPLS terminates to) with the destination subnet being in the other site between the qwest router and our router (Did that at both sites). I havent created any static routes for remote sites internal subnets because I would like EIGRP to do that, I don't want to rely on Static routes for routing between sites as far as our internal routing.
So I guess, my question is 2 fold:
What else do I need to do to get EIGRP to know about the path between sites over MPLS besides through the GRE tunnel?
How would you control traffic so only Multicast traversed the GRE tunnel where all other traffic would go over MPLS natively?
Any help you could lend would be very much appriciated!

Thanks for the reply Laurent!
Ok, so I just got off the phone our SP and they said they do not support Multicast transport over MPLS... so your assumption is correct...
I see, so it sounds like I want to stay away from allowing all traffic to traverse between sites over MPLS via GRE... I never considered the issue with scaling when using GRE for all traffic. Good to know!
While I was on the phone with our SP, I talked with them about routing protocol's they support via MPLS, to which they responded with BGP as really the only option.
FYI, this is our current WAN arrangement between 2 of the sites:
Site A>Cisco 2811>Adtran Router (SP provided)>PE-PESite B
Site A>Cisco 2811 (same as above)>Adtran Router (SP provided)>PE-PESite B
The SP suggested we run OSPF between our hardware and the Adtran routers and then 2-way redistribute subnets between EIGRP to OSPF and then from OSPF to BGP as follows:
EIGRP ran inside Site A and B
OSPF running on outside facing interface on 2811 and 6509
OSPF running on inside interfaces on Adtran routers
Private AS BGP running on Adtran with Public AS neighbor to PE device
This should work, but wouldn't it work for me to just configure BGP on our 2811 and have a IBGP adjacency between it and the Adtran Router and then filter what routes are redistributed from and to IBGP on our 2811 into EIGRP? If this would work, does one design have any advantages over the other? It seems like the EIGRP to OSPF to BGP idea has to many moving parts...
My objective is to allow all devices in all locations (4 MPLS sites) to route dynamically, verses relying on static routes.
Regarding the Tunnel config's... I see... Excellent example. OK, so it sounds and looks like I would first configure each site with the routing protocol solution, then, implement GRE with per the example provided, and that would accomplish Multicast over GRE and everything else over MPLS! Thanks alot Laurent!
So what would you recommend regarding the routing protocol structure?

Dynamic routing in OSB

Environment: OSB 10.3.1
To avoid manual configuring all published services one-by-one (eg. alter logging), I'd like to implement a generic proxy pattern in OSB. Assume that I have business services at /bs1, /bs2, etc, proxy services at /ps1, /ps2, etc.
What I'd like to achieve is to publish proxy services which routes to the generic proxy first and then reroute to the original proxy service. For this I published eg. /pps1, /pps2, etc all with an Insert action which saves $inbound/ctx:transport/ctx:uri to . in $header and then route to the genericproxy proxy service.
Generic proxy starts by executing common logic in the pipeline (log, etc), then should fetch the original routing information from the header and use dynamic routing to direct the message to the right proxy service (/ps1, /ps2, etc).
Now the questions:
1. is this the right approach to solve the problem of generic configuration of multiple published services in OSB?
2. appearently the uri itself is not enough for dynamic routing - what else do I need to save from the original message?
3. can I construct a <ctx:route><ctx:service..><ctx:operation..> construct with only Insert actions? I'd need a concrete example here accomplishing this.
Thanks.

Well you have to add Route Node to your proxy pipeline and inside it add a Dynamic Routing action.
If you select the Dynamic Routing action you'll see in the Properties view something like:
Service: <Expression>
Here is where you have to define the <ctx:route> element. You can basically paste the text here.
You could also create an XQuery transformation (so you can reuse it later) and invoke it here (with the XQuery Resources tab). But if you're not very familiar with XQuery I'd advise to start with the first option just to see it working.
At first you could also omit the {$proxy} variable and statically specify the service you want to route to. Or you could use an Assign action to define the $proxy (or any name you want to give it) variable. And then once that's working see if you can get the service path from the headers.
Hope that helps

Dynamic Routing Using Query String (SOAP)

Hi Folks,
Does anyone have any examples on how to do a dynamic routing using a query string from a SOAP Adapter. I know how to get the query string but don't know how to map for dynamic routing.
Thanks,
AArhyn.

After some further examination it seems that both calls are picked up by the same interface. In the RWB both the messages are picked up by the MIOS_GetDetails...
How can i fix this?

Dynamic Routing in BPEL 11g

Hi,
I have requirement where i need to dynamically call different WSDL with related xsd's. Currently i have two target system & i have two xsd's. But in future suppose third taregt system will come in picture than i need to change configuration & code will work without changing & deploying original code. Is this possible in BPEL? If yes, could you please provide tutorial related that.
I heard that using mediator we can achive that but i could not able to find any docs for dynamic routing using mediator.
Thanks

Hi,
I had dealt with dynamic routing in BPEL not sure about mediator though.
You can check the following link.
http://www.oracle.com/technology/pub/articles/bpel_cookbook/carey.html
Thanks,
Mohammad

Dynamic routing for a Business Service with multiple operations

I have two business services with multiple operations. Business service A (bsA) has operations OpA1 and OpA2. Business service B (bsB) has operations OpB1 and OpB2.
Depending on incoming Proxy message and operation, I have to do one of the following
1. If someValue = A and operation= Op1 then invoke operation opA1 of bsA
2. If someValue = B and operation= Op1 then invoke operation opB1 of bsB
3. If someValue = C and operation= Op1 then invoke operation opA1 of bsA AND* operation opB1 of bsB and return aggregate data of both invocations
1. If someValue = A and operation= Op2 then invoke operation opA2 of bsA
2. If someValue = B and operation= Op2 then invoke operation opB2 of bsB
3. If someValue = C and operation= Op2 then invoke operation opA2 of bsA AND* operation opB2 of bsB and return aggregate data of both invocations
Using a dynamic route node or dynamic routing options, I am able to achieve cases 1, 2, 4, and 5.
But for cases 3 & 6, I can not use a route node. When I use a Service call out instead, then I am forced to create a Operational branch but that does not seem like the best design since for every new operation added to the business services, I have to add a new branch to the Operational branch and redo all the functionality for that branch.
Basically, I am looking to achieve the functionality of the Route node ( no need to specify the operation ).
Any thoughts/ideas on what the best design would be?
thanks

For cases 3 & 6, why don't you route to another proxy service where you can simple do two service callouts, merge output data somehow and return them to the first proxy?
If you look for "special route feature", that could possibly call two services for a single message, I'm afraid you won't succeed.

Dynamic Routing for Failover L2L VPN

Hi,
Can someone offer me some guidance with this issue please?
I've attached a simple diagram of our WAN for reference.
Overview
Firewall is ASA 5510 running 8.4(9)
Core network at Head Office uses OSPF
Static routes on ASA are redistributed into OSPF
Static routes on ASA for VPN are redistributed into OSPF with Metric of 130 so redistributed BGP routes are preferred
Core network has a static route of 10.0.0.0/8 to Corporate WAN, which is redistributed into OSPF
Branch Office WAN uses BGP - Routes are redistributed into OSPF
The routers at the Branch Office use VRRP for IP redundancy for the local clients default gateway.
Primary Branch Office router will pass off VRRP IP to backup router when the WAN interface is down
Backup BO router (.253) only contains a default route to internet
Under normal operation, traffic to/from BO uses Local Branch Office WAN
If local BO WAN link fails, traffic to/from BO uses IPSec VPN across public internet
I'm trying to configure dynamic routing on our network for when a branch office fails over to the IPsec VPN. What I would like to happen (not sure if it's possible) is for the ASA to advertise the subnet at the remote end of the VPN back into OSPF at the Head Office.
I've managed to get this to work using RRI, but for some reason the VPN stays up all the time when we're not in a failover scenario. This causes the ASA to add the remote subnet into it's routing table as a Static route, and not use the route advertised from OSPF from the core network. This prevents clients at the BO from accessing the Internet. If I remove the RRI setting on the VPN, the ASA learns the route to the subnet via the BO WAN - normal operation is resumed.
I have configured the metric of the static routes that get redistributed into OSPF by the ASA to be higher than 110. This is so that the routes redistributed by BGP from the BO WAN into OSPF, are preferred. The idea being, that when the WAN link is available again, the routing changes automatically and the site fails back to the BO WAN.
I suppose what I need to know is; Is this design feasible, and if so where am I going wrong?
Thanks,
Paul

Hi Paul,
your ASA keeps the tunnel alive only because that route exists on ASA. Therefore you have to use IP-SLA on ASA to push network taffic "10.10.10.0/24" based on the echo-reply, by using IP-SLA
Please look at example below, in the example below shows the traffic will flow via the tunnel, only in the event the ASA cannot reach network 10.10.10.0/24 via HQ internal network.
This config will go on ASA,
route inside 10.10.10.0 255.255.2550 10.0.0.2 track 10
(assuming 10.0.0.2 the peering ip of inside ip address of router at HO)
route outside 10.10.10.0 255.255.255.0 254 xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx
(value 254 is higher cost of the route to go via IPSec tunnel and x = to default-gateway of ISP)
sla monitor 99
type echo protocol ipIcmpEcho 10.10.10.254 interface inside
num-packets 3
frequency 10
sla monitor schedule 99 life forever start-time now
track 10 rtr 99 reachability
Let me know, if this helps.
thanks
Rizwan Rafeek

Can LC Designer produce a flat PDF, not form, as a template for dynamic content?

Can LiveCycle Designer produce a flat PDF, not form, as a template for dynamic content?

Yes that means LiveCycle Designer .....the XDP is an XML file that describes the template that you want. It is turned into a PDF by the Designer as well as the LC Server I mentioned. The Designer creates interactive content (not what you asked for), the server can do the same as well as flat PDFs. I mentioned the batch mode because that is how people generally use it or they use it for real time creation of the reports but it tends to be high volume (it is a server product so it will bepriced that way). You can create an XDP that has text and "floating fields" on it. Floating Fields are special in that you can merge data with the template and once the data is put into the field it is turned into text (non-interactive). This woudl be useful for testing (requires a hands on approach) but if there is any kind of volume that you are looking for this will not be useful. The server side can be automated so that no human intervention is required.
Paul

I´m doing a design for presale, where I will need a router what support PAT for 500 or a little more of users, it not need any more features only static routing and dhcp pool for 500 users, can you help me for know what router recommend?

I´m doing a design for presale, where I will need a router what support PAT for 500 or a little more of users, it not need any more features only static routing and dhcp pool for 500 users, can you help me for know what router recommend?

What is your WAN speed currently and projected WAN speed in the next 3 years?

Applying dynamic routing feature on outdoor wireless connection for load ba

Gentlemen,
Does the Cisco outdoor wireless unit support dynamic routing (e.g. RIP or others) to do the load balancing between leased line and wireless connection.
I am looking to confirm if the outdoor unit has the routing features to apply this scenario.
Thank you,

No Response !!!!
Pls your action.
Thank you,

Issue in Dynamic routing (OSB)

Hi,
I implemented dynamic routing in OSB,using xQuery:-
+<tradingPartnerList xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:noNamespaceSchemaLocation="C:\bea910\user_projects\eclipse\TradingPartners.xsd">+
+     <tp>+
+          <Name>Platinum</Name>+
+          <URL>DynamicDispatch/p1</URL>+
+     </tp>+
+<tp>+
+          <Name>Gold</Name>+
+          <URL>DynamicDispatch/p2</URL>+
+     </tp>+
+</tradingPartnerList>+
I am routing it on to another proxy using following xml:-
<ctx:route>
<ctx:service isProxy='true'>{$endpoint}</ctx:service>
<ctx:operation>null</ctx:operation>
</ctx:route>
Where the Endpoint is from the above xQuery..
All work fine but i have a one Issue:-
In <ctx:service isProxy='true'>{$endpoint}</ctx:service> we specify the folder structure of the proxyservice. but what if i move my proxy in future,if i move some of my proxy to other folder the xquery need to be changed which i feel is vv poor design.
Is there any way where is can specify URL or URI of the proxy service????

Is there any way where is can specify URL or URI of the proxy service????First of all, you would not like to move your resources here and there frequently in production. Secondly, if you move the resources, definitely you have to change X-Query/Message flow. There is no alternative.
If you want this feature to be enhanced, please raise a ER with Oracle Support and if they find it valid, will provide a patch for the same.
Regards,
Anuj

Task assignment adapter - dynamic route to either group or user

I have configured an approval process in design console and I want to be able to dynamically route the approval request to either the target user manager OR a group. I have written logic/code to automatically determine what group or user to route the request to and also to set the key type to either user or group depending on my logic conditions.
This code is executed in a task assignment adapter and set the values for the key type and key depending on the logic.
i.e. the key type would be "user" and key would be the user key for the target user manager, if my logic determines it should be routed to a manager
OR
the key type would be "group" and key would be the group key for the approval group, if my logic determines it should be routed to a group
HOWEVER MY PROBLEM is with assigning the adapter to a process task. I am thinking I would need to have two entries in the Assignment tab of the process task. The first entry has the default rule and I assigned the target type to "group" and include my adapter here.
How do I go about assigning the second entry for target type "user"? Since "Default" is the only rule option and I am not able to use it twice.
I tried to create a rule in the Rule Definition form and create a Task Assignment rule that might do something to check if a task is assigned to "user", so that I can have this as my second rule in the Assignment tab of the process task and if it is true, it would call my adapter that would return the key for the target user's manager.
I DO NOT KNOW what conditions to set in the Rule Element window for the Task Assignment rule. Can someone tell me what to do here OR provide me with a better alternative.

Thanks for all the responses. Approvals are now being routed correctly.
I have a follow-up question though........ I created a process adapter to send notifications to either the target user manager or members of the group that is the approval is routed to.
I have a notification process task as part of my approval process and in its Integration tab, I added my process adapter that sends notifications.
The code for the adapter uses the same logic I described in my original question to determine if the approval is being routed to a user of group. If it is routed to a group, the notification adapter identifies members of the group and sends email to them, this part works fine.
However the problem is when the logic determines it should be routed to the target user's manager. One of the variables of this notification process adapter is username of the target user. Using that username, my code determines who the manager, gets the manager's email address and sends the email. Problem with this is that when mapping variables for process adapters in the Integration tab, in the Map To field, it does not give you the option of mapping to Request Target User, which would have provided me with user attributes of the target user such as the user name. It provides option for the Requester, but my reality is that the Requester is not always the Target User.
Any suggestions for fixing this would be greatly appreciated.

Mediator dynamic routing

Hi,
has anyone implemented mediator dynamic routing successfully (11.1.1.5)?
when trying to do it, none of the rules is selected, and when creating a function to test it on jdeveloper it returns an error :
oracle.rules.sdk2.exception.SDKException: RUL-05016: The Java class "oracle.tip.mediator.rules.model.ObjectFactory" cannot be loaded. Ensure that the class and all its dependent classes are on either the class path or the user-specified path.
The error message on the instance is:
Non Recoverable Business Fault :
Fact not found in the rule engine working memory, rule session execution failed. The rule session 771038 failed because an instance of the fact oracle.tip.mediator.rules.model.DynamicRouting could not be found in the working memory of the rule session. This is most likely a rule modeling error. The decision service interaction expects the fact instance to exist in the working memory of the rule session. Check the rule actions in rule designer and make sure that a fact of the expected type is being asserted. If the error persists, contact Oracle Support Services. 771038
Any help?
Regards.
Edited by: 903432 on 14/Abr/2012 9:46

Hi,
How are you planning to design your composite ? Right now system B uses Version 1, so you will be adding transformation for Version2 to Version 1.Once your System B is upgraded then it will have to consume Version2 of xsd, for which you have to remove the transformation from mediator and update your webservice with schema 2. In that case you have to redeploy your code.
Are you planning to use BPEL after mediator, or directly you would be calling system B using mediator as standalone component?
How much differenc is between version 1 and version 2 schemas structure wise? Are both of them altogether different ?
Regards,
Karan

Dynamic routing mediator running continuously

Using Dynamic routing mediator i called a BPEL process but after calling the target BPEL process instance of the Dynamic routing mediator composite running continuously.
Why is it happening?
how we can send callback data to source from Mediator?

Hi,
How are you planning to design your composite ? Right now system B uses Version 1, so you will be adding transformation for Version2 to Version 1.Once your System B is upgraded then it will have to consume Version2 of xsd, for which you have to remove the transformation from mediator and update your webservice with schema 2. In that case you have to redeploy your code.
Are you planning to use BPEL after mediator, or directly you would be calling system B using mediator as standalone component?
How much differenc is between version 1 and version 2 schemas structure wise? Are both of them altogether different ?
Regards,
Karan

Dynamic Routing Protocols - what do I really need to know?

Ok, ridiculously broad question I know but....what I'm trying to figure out is, let's say I'm in a large coproration and I have multiple field sites in different areas of the country so the network setup may be somewhat complex but when it comes to setting up the dynamic routing...is it as simple as let's say, configuring a router to use BGP for whatever portion you designate then just letting it be? is it somewhat challenging to initally configure dynamic routing protocols (i.e. how often have you found yourselves worrying about admin distance, areas (I don't even know what an "area" is yet either so if anyone could explain that I would appreciate it), etc..
So in short, are dynamic routing protocols "Set it and forget it" or do they require a ton of planning to setup? I'm familliar with the differences between them (i.e. OSPF, RIP, EIGRP,etc..) and the differences in link state and distance vector but I just wanted to ask about the setup of the protocols themselves.
Thanks!!

You can exchange routes between protocols with redistribution.
The problem with the question is, as you say, it is too broad to really answer properly.
All routing protocols have different considerations so what you might do for EIGRP you may not do with OSPF and BGP is different altogether.
As a general answer if you are enabling it across a WAN all take a certain amout of planning and design and they all rely heavily on what you have done with your IP addressing in terms of summarisation etc.
The actual configurations to get a basic setup running are relatively simple, certainly for IGPs, but as your network grows you may find the configurations becoming more complex
BGP is a very different in that there are many different commands you can use to influence the path traffic takes but even here to setup a very basic BGP peering only requires a few commands.
But no routing protocol in a large environment should just be configured with no thought as to how it is going to work, traffic paths, number of routes etc.
You can do it but you may well find as your network grows you will end up having to revisit the whole thing because it is not working as you intended.
Like I say it's too large a question to really answer because each routing protocol is different and may or may not meet the requirements of the network.
If there are more specific questions then please feel free to ask.
Jon

OEG Design for dynamic routing

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for