axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Toshiyuki Kimura <>
Subject Re: MustUnderstand faults
Date Thu, 21 Aug 2003 04:24:50 GMT
Hi Chris, Srianth, and folks,

  It seems to me that we reache a consensus on a part of this
matter. Chris, and I have made an equivalent response to Srianth,
despite with two different point of views as "Acutial condition
with Axis implementation" and "Idealized vision to accord with
several specifications (i.e SOAP 1.1, 1.2, and JAX-RPC)".

In JAX-RPC.......

  If you have two JAX-RPC handler, below is the workflow.

 | A |-->A1#handleRequest()----->A2#HandleRequest()------+
 | x |                                                 Endpint
 | i |                                                   V
 | s |<--A1#handleResponse()<----A2#HandleResponse()<----+

You may add a header on A1#handleRequest() or A1#handleResponse().

  Srinath, if you add a MU header on A1#handleRequest() with a
role as 'next', the node couldn't be distinguished whether it is
sure for A2 or not by A2#HandleRequest().
  I think that the 'next' of role-attribute has a special meaning
what the attribute is for the *NEXT* SOAP node (i.e. not for the
current SOAP node, = not for other handlers behind A1).
  But, A2#HandleRequest() has no way to know the 'next' is added
by A1#handleRequest() or the right predecessor as an intermediary.
Thus, A1#HandleRequest() shouldn't add a MU header as a role 'next'.
If you strictly want to pass the node to the next intermediary,
you should add the node on A1#handleResponse().

Could you make a sense ?

  In addition, I believe Axis is a major JAX-RPC implementation.
But, it doesn't mean that Axis perfectly supports all of spec such
as SOAP 1.1, 1.2, and JAX-RPC 1.0.  The great majority of SOAP 1.1
and JAX-RPC 1.0, and also a small part of SOAP 1.2 have coverd in
Axis of version 1.1 final.  Axis will continuously work to accord
with whole of SOAP 1.2, and any others (WS-I basic profile ?).

Toshi <>

-----Original Message-----
From: []
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2003 12:02 PM
Subject: Re: MustUnderstand faults

Hi Cris

Thanks for the posting...
What you mean is if the handler want he can make the header added
to be processed in down stream. Am quite agree with you.

But what does SOAP spec say ... Should that handler process in the
downstream or next handler.. I feel the spec does not provide a
clear cut senario and it is to handler to decide...what to do ..

Thanks for your time ... These part with headers seem to be so
unclear ...
the flow thought of all the people where very helpful...


On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 06:39:00 -0700 (PDT), Chris Haddad wrote
> In Axis.......
> if you place the header in the request message and don't qualify the
> actor/role, then a handler will assume that it should be processed.
> I do not believe there is a facility for a handler to distinguish
> between the original headers sent by the client and headers added
> during processing. The benefit is that a handler can transform the
> headers into internal representations that are processed downstream.
>  Also, headers can be attached to augment the message context.
> if you place the header in the response message, then it will be
> passed to the next soap intermediary and it is clear that it should
> not be processed by at least the request flow handlers.
> /Chris
> On Wed, 20 Aug 2003 wrote:
> > Hi Toshi
> >
> > what I mean as NEXT is
"" the
> > role given in SOAP Spec.
> >
> > what I mean is the Header addes by A1 has it's role as
> > "" then who is going
to play
> > the next role.
> >
> > Is it next HANDLER or next NODE...
> >
> > Thanks for your time ..(enthusiasum on the subject ..) :)
> > sorry for not making clear what next is ..
> >
> > regards
> >
> > Srianth

View raw message