OpenPEPPOL eDelivery Forum

OpenPEPPOL eDelivery Forum

346 members
  • Join

    When you join a group, other members will be able to see your profile and message you. The group logo will be visible on your profile unless you change that setting.

  • Information and settings

Have something to say? Join LinkedIn for free to participate in the conversation. When you join, you can comment and post your own discussions.

Arun

Which one is to choose 1. Reference implementation 2. Oxalis implementation or 3. peppol-silicone?

Application Architect, Network Services R&D at Basware

Hi,

While going through and understanding different peppol reference implementation, I want to know why we have these different implementation.

After investigation, I found that peppol-silicone is staging area of Peppol reference implementation (peppol EIA).

Now, I want to know why we have Oxalis and reference implementation (peppol EIA) work going on side by side. Is it because, it is being hosted by two communities of developers OR is it because both have different audience/ specific sets of rule implementations?

I can see both implementation have big list of bugs to be resolved. i.e. all projects are still not finished yet (not mature enough) and continue evolving and fixing bugs.

Now is it possible for someone to throw some light when to choose which implementation? What are things we need to understand before choosing one implementation over other?

I know, it is not easy question to answer... But at least answer to this question helps majority in choosing right implementation.

Regards,

Arun Kumar

  • Comment (10)
  • April 5, 2012
  • Close viewer

Comments

  • Kenneth B.

    Kenneth

    Kenneth B.

    Chief Executive Officer at Efact

    Hi Arun

    There is no "reference implementation" as such. PEPPOL develops and maintains what we call the "sample implementation" - this is sample software developed to make individual implementations of PEPPOL components easier and to help explain the specifications. The sample implementations are the only software components developed by PEPPOL itself and is available through the PEPPOL EIA:

    http://www.peppol.eu/peppol_components/peppol-eia/eia#ict-architecture/transport-infrastructure/services-components

    Oxalis and Silicone are both open source initiatives based on the PEPPOL sample implementation, and both bring added value to the original code. Oxalis lowers the technical barrier by providing a more "off the shelf" software that is more easily accessed, and Silicone provides a very complete software architecture that integrates SMP etc. They also bring valuable input back to the PEPPOL sample implementation development, so you can say that in a way they provide a "staging area" for new official PEPPOL software releases, though PEPPOL also receives input for new releases from the PEPPOL Pilot Implementation Unit (ISU) and others. It's a positive circle where different software packages meet different requirements, and they all help each other improve.

    Which to choose very much depends on your requirements - there is no "one size fits all". Important to understand is that a PEPPOL Access Point is essentially a gateway, and as is in the definition of a gateway it has two sides: One side faces the PEPPOL infrastructure and the other side faces your own backend systems. Oxalis, Silicone and PEPPOL sample implementations all focuses on the side that faces PEPPOL, so in all cases you need to think about how to integrate to your existing systems and products.

    Hope this brings a little clarity.

  • Arun K.

    Arun

    Arun K.

    Application Architect, Network Services R&D at Basware

    Hi Kenneth,

    Thank you very much for detailed explanation.

    I am working on all implementation. I found Silicone implementation very good for handling SMP things. Yes, I do agree that Oxalis implementation is easy and/or faster way to integrate.

    Once again thanks!

  • Arun K.

    Arun

    Arun K.

    Application Architect, Network Services R&D at Basware

    Hi Kenneth,

    I found interesting difference in naming convention and terms used by Oxalis and peppol-silicone. E.g. accesspointService name in sample implementation and Silicone and accessPointService (notice caps 'P') in service name.

    Sample implementation use Destination Access Point, where Oxalis refer it as inbound.

    My general feeling that we must have common naming convention and main terms in different implementation. It may create confusion...


    Arun Kumar

  • Kenneth B.

    Kenneth

    Kenneth B.

    Chief Executive Officer at Efact

    Hi Arun

    Choosing a service name is entirely up to the individual Access Point service provider. PEPPOL does not have a policy or provide recommendations. You may call your service "Aruns-AP" if you like :-)

    Resolving the service name is done dynamically as part of the SML/SMP discovery process so there is no need for an access point service to know the service name in advance.

  • Philip H.

    Philip

    Philip H.

    Owner phloc systems; Senior consultant at Austrian Federal Computing Center; member of PEPPOL.AT

    Hi Arun!
    We are aware, that the current situation is not as good as it can get.
    All 3 implementations have different ambition levels, and Silicone and Oxalis are clearly 2 implementations that should be merged in the future.
    But having these different implementations also means that you see different ways of complying to the specification, and how to approach a problem.

    For silicone we're always looking for ambitioned developers, that are willing to help to improve the whole system and make it even better :)

    // Philip

  • Steinar O.

    Steinar

    Steinar O.

    Director of R&D at UNIT4 Agresso AS

    Silicone is probably the most complete in terms of functionality like for instance SMP, while Oxalis is perhaps easier to use and is supported by the Norwegian government.

    I wish somebody would fund the combination of Silicone and Oxalis into a single implementation :-)

Have something to say? Join LinkedIn for free to participate in the conversation. When you join, you can comment and post your own discussions.

Your group posting status

Your posts across groups are being moderated temporarily because one of your recent contributions was marked as spam or flagged for not being relevant. Learn more.

Feedback