Update README.adoc

README.adoc

@@ -7,3 +7,27 @@ Name: Keith Hazelton, TAP
 or +
 Async-for-IAM advocates respond to charges of heedless frivolity*
 
+*Many challenges have been raised to the viability of asynchronous and concurrent messaging architectures as a basis for identity and access management processes*
+
+- At any step in the prescribed flow from causes to effects in IAM processing, errors may occur 
+- Those errors may lead to unintended or unanticipated failures. 
+- Failures tend to be detected only when someone notices a mismatch between what was supposed to happen and what actually happened.
+- Challengers to this approach say that a difference between intended and actual results cannot be reliably traced back to its root cause because everything is in motion and states are constantly in flux.
+
+*Responding to the challenges*
+
+In the current state of the art, settable configurations of messaging infrastructures can guarantee certain properties that may be useful in preventing or compensating for potential error conditions. These include:
+
+'Exactly once' guarantees on delivery
+'Idempotent functions'
+'Read-only, time-stamped, persistent, immutable, event logs'
+'Event sourcing'
+'Back pressure'
+...
+...
+
+auto scaling, auto recovery from service failures all the usual robustness measures
+
+*Can these be combined to mitigate failure modes of event-driven, async, concurrent architectures?* 
+
+