Before XI

[Former Member]

Currently in our environment to do A2A integration ( Mainframe to R/3) we are using XI. To do the B2B integration (SRM to Vendors) we are using XI.

My question here is before XI how they were achieving the A2A integration or B2B integration? Please help me.

[MichalKrawczyk · Accepted solution]

Hi,

maybe they were using XI's predecessor:

<b>Business Connector</b>

Regards,

michal

[Former Member]

Mohan,

The applications which you are using within the organisation from Mainframes to R/3 is what A2A applicaitons i.e, you have various applicaitons in Mainframes so you might be moving the data or upgrading to SAP with the help of XI. Since this all is happening between your own organisation it is A2A.

But in B2B, you have to use external adapters or Rosettanet, cdix etc. If the external vendors want directly to connect to SAP with XI you can do it but there might be some security issues. If the vendors are also using Mainframes then they can dump their files in some staging area within your organisation. From there XI can pick it up.

---Mohan

[Former Member]

Thanks Mohan.

But I think, I didn't frame my question properly, its looks like.

Before XI was introduced what was the tool or technique been used to integrate the 1) A2A scenarios and 2) B2B scenario?

[Former Member]

Thanks Michal. So whats the Big Difference between the Business Connector /ITS vs XI?

Why most of the organizations are moving for XI, when they have BC or ITS or ALE-IDOC as the Integration Mechanism?

[moorthy]

Hi Mohan,

As mentioned in the earlier reply, there are SAP Connectors are available to connect to Java Systems (JCO ), to coonect Microsoft Systems (.net Connectors).

For SAP to SAP communications they were/are doing thru peer to peer communications with the help of Idocs etc.

In many cases, still BDC programs are used to upload the master/Transactional data from the legacy systems.

Hope this helps,

Regards,

Moorthy

[MichalKrawczyk]

hi,

because BC will soon not be supported

and it's not continued for some time

for example it works only with java 1.3 ....

+ BC does not support new connections

like ABAP proxies for example

Regards,

michal

[Former Member]

Thanks Krishna and Michal.

I have one more question, XI tells it avoids the Point to Point communication? How its true?

For example if App-1 wants to talk to App2 and App3, We need separate Message mappings for APP2 and APP3. So even with XI we are going for Point to Point connection? Could you please clarify this point?

[MichalKrawczyk]

Hi,

point to point means that you're not using middleware (like XI)

to create, maintain and monitor all of your interfaces

from one place that's all

with XI you do everything in one place right?

with point to point you have to do mappings etc

at every application (at every end)

Regards,

michal

[moorthy]

Hi Mohan,

<i>For example if App-1 wants to talk to App2 and App3, We need separate Message mappings for APP2 and APP3. So even with XI we are going for Point to Point connection? Could you please clarify this point?</i>

You need to have separate mappings etc. But you can centralize all your configurations in one place. So XI is a Centarlized Integration Platform. Think XI is an EAI Tool .

To know more~

https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/servlet/prt/portal/prtroot/docs/library/uuid/d774bd90-0201-0010-6389-9fd...

https://www.sdn.sap.com/irj/servlet/prt/portal/prtroot/docs/media/uuid/c001bdad-0701-0010-34aa-c0662...

Hope this helps,

Regards,

Moorthy

[Former Member]

Michal, I am not clear with your answer, specially the following point with point to point you have to do mappings etc at every application (at every end)

For example When I want to do integration from Mainframe to R/3 with out a Middleware, I need to write a COBOL program that will convert the Data to a specified format (Say IDOC format). Then this data will be shipped to R/3 and further processing will take place in R/3.

With XI we have one mapping program (Message mapping) that has the source and Target structure(R/3), once the data is received in R/3 thur IDOC format, it has to be processed again in R/3.

So whats the Major difference you see or whats the advantage of using an XI?

[Former Member]

Thanks moorthy, but I am not convinced with your answer.

Just because everything is Centralized, it doesnt serve any big purpose, if thats the case then I could have an Excellent Central documentation tool, that can document varios applications and how they are bridged!!!

From my point of View, XI is not adding any value addition to the organization, probably XI_legeds may can give an answer to my question/

[Former Member]

Any response from the XI-Gurus?

[Former Member]

Plllllllllleaaaaaaaaase

[MichalKrawczyk]

Hi,

>>>>So whats the Major difference you see or whats the advantage of using an XI?

let's say we have 20 big systems (so 20 specialists)

if they want to connect with point to point

they all have to talk with each other

with middleware (like XI) they only talk with "one" XI guy

and they don't care about any other systems

they know that XI guy asks them to provide some data and they don't care what he does with it...

it the same with development & maintanaince

and what happens in one interface fails ?

which one is it? who is responsible for it?

do we have to employ 20 people to monitor them?

no we just have on XI guy admin who monitors everything

and he knows what's going on with <b>every</b> interface

when you're working with a company that has many interafces you will see it

Regards,

michal