axis-java-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andreas Veithen <andreas.veit...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: WSDL generation for the services exposed only in local transport
Date Wed, 27 Jul 2011 08:34:12 GMT
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 07:52, Amila Suriarachchi
<amilasuriarachchi@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 10:45 AM, Amila Suriarachchi
> <amilasuriarachchi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 6:07 PM, Andreas Veithen
>> <andreas.veithen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> So, the bottom line is that it is OK to introduce a component into
>>> Axis2 that violates the Axis2 API (NonBlockingLocalTransportSender
>>> sets an incorrect value for the serverSide property) and it is not
>>> worth trying to understand how this can be fixed such that it works
>>> both in a pure Axis2 context and in Synapse?
>>
>> Here no new component is introduced. It is improving an existing thing.
>>
>>
>>>
>>> NonBlockingLocalTransportSender actually works just fine with the
>>> ServiceClient API if the incorrect code is changed so that it sets
>>> serverSide=false.
>>
>> Which line you talk about? if your concern about this property?
>
> And also how to define the server side and client side of Axis2? Can you
> please explain why it works with server side false and not server side true?

serverSide is set to true if and only if the message context
corresponds to an incoming message received by a transport listener.
All transports in the Axis2 project (including the Transports project)
satisfy this requirement, except for NonBlockingLocalTransportSender
which is the reason why it doesn't work. See my comment in AXIS2-4944
for more information about where the incorrect code is located and how
to test this.

> thanks,
> Amila.
>>
>> thanks,
>> Amila.
>>
>>>
>>> Did somebody actually check what happens in Synapse
>>> when NonBlockingLocalTransportSender is made compliant with the Axis2
>>> API? Some time ago there was a similar problem with other transports
>>> (WSCOMMONS-444) and the conclusion was that it required a change in
>>> Synapse to make these transports work properly with both Axis2 and
>>> Synapse. It is likely that this fix in Synapse also covers the case of
>>> NonBlockingLocalTransportSender.
>>>
>>> Andreas
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 11:22, Amila Suriarachchi
>>> <amilasuriarachchi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 10:55 PM, Andreas Veithen
>>> > <andreas.veithen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Just to summarize:
>>> >>
>>> >> * We have added a NonBlockingLocalTransportSender into the Axis2 code
>>> >> base that doesn't respect the Axis2 APIs and that only works in
>>> >> Synapse (see AXIS2-4944).
>>> >> * I took us 5 JIRA issues (AXIS2-4967, AXIS2-5035, AXIS2-5036,
>>> >> AXIS2-5037 and AXIS2-5043) to add a TransportListener for the local
>>> >> transport. That TransportListener only implements the methods to
>>> >> calculate the EPR, but it actually calculates the wrong EPR (see
>>> >> AXIS2-5043).
>>> >> * Now the proposal is to hardcode something into the kernel to exclude
>>> >> these EPRs from WSDL generation.
>>> >>
>>> >> Can somebody please explain me what we are trying to achieve here?
>>> >
>>> > If you go through this thread you can see the answers. But let me tell
>>> > you
>>> > again.
>>> >
>>> > 1. Exposing a service only with local transport. The motivation is the
>>> > security. When you expose a service only with local transport then that
>>> > service is automatically secured. Can you suggest a way to do this with
>>> > Axis2 1.6?
>>> >
>>> > 2. Second is to improve the existing local transport to work within a
>>> > synapse proxy service. This does not have a use case only at axis2
>>> > level
>>> > (same as axis2 can't use synapse nhttp transport to send/receive
>>> > messages).
>>> > But I think improving the existing thing rather than having a separate
>>> > transport in synapse does not make any problem.
>>> >
>>> > thanks,
>>> > Amila.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >> Andreas
>>> >>
>>> >> On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 15:06, Heshan Suriyaarachchi
>>> >> <heshan.suriyaarachchi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> > Hi Amila,
>>> >> >
>>> >> > On Sat, Jun 25, 2011 at 12:29 PM, Amila Suriarachchi
>>> >> > <amilasuriarachchi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Heshan Suriyaarachchi
>>> >> >> <heshan.suriyaarachchi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> Hi Andreas,
>>> >> >>> So, in that case does that mean, we are going to
>>> >> >>> 1) revert all the improvements did to the local transport
OR
>>> >> >>> 2) just remove the NonBlockingTransportListener class only?
>>> >> >>> If it is the first option, then we have to improve the
local
>>> >> >>> transport
>>> >> >>> in
>>> >> >>> such a way that a user should be able to extended the local
>>> >> >>> transport
>>> >> >>> implementation and write a custom implementation. That
will help
>>> >> >>> us to
>>> >> >>> move
>>> >> >>> the Synapse specific local transport to Synapse itself.
>>> >> >>> If it is the second option, then we wont have to change
that much
>>> >> >>> of
>>> >> >>> code
>>> >> >>> level change.
>>> >> >>> Although we have discussed about local transport here,
my original
>>> >> >>> question still remains ie. improving WSDL generation logic
to
>>> >> >>> support
>>> >> >>> WSDL
>>> >> >>> generation for serivces that is only exposed in local transport.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> Can you please test the given patch with the attached local
>>> >> >> transport
>>> >> >> sender. This should allow you to export the service with only
local
>>> >> >> transport.
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> It has hard coded the name local. but if you see this method
same
>>> >> >> thing
>>> >> >> has done for http and https as well.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I tested your patch and with the given patch, the local endpoints
>>> >> > are
>>> >> > not
>>> >> > shown in the generated WSDL. I have created a jira [1] to track
the
>>> >> > issue.
>>> >> > There were some test failures and I will fix them and attach the
>>> >> > patch
>>> >> > to
>>> >> > the jira.
>>> >> >
>>> >> > [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2-5085
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> thanks,
>>> >> >> Amila.
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 1:09 PM, Andreas Veithen
>>> >> >>> <andreas.veithen@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> Since there is a consensus that NonBlockingLocalTransportSender
>>> >> >>>> doesn't work with a pure Axis2 setup, is not unit testable
and is
>>> >> >>>> only
>>> >> >>>> relevant for Synapse, the logical conclusion would
be that it
>>> >> >>>> should
>>> >> >>>> not be included in Axis2 but in Synapse.
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> Andreas
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 08:43, Heshan Suriyaarachchi
>>> >> >>>> <heshan.suriyaarachchi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>>> >
>>> >> >>>> >
>>> >> >>>> > On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:27 AM, Andreas Veithen
>>> >> >>>> > <andreas.veithen@gmail.com>
>>> >> >>>> > wrote:
>>> >> >>>> >>
>>> >> >>>> >> On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 08:48, Heshan Suriyaarachchi
>>> >> >>>> >> <heshan.suriyaarachchi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> >>>> >> > Hi Devs,
>>> >> >>>> >> > I am opening up this thread to discuss
$subject.
>>> >> >>>> >> > Recently, I did some improvements [1]
to the Axis2 local
>>> >> >>>> >> > transport,
>>> >> >>>> >> > inorder
>>> >> >>>> >> > to get it working against Synapse nhttp
transport. Now the
>>> >> >>>> >> > local
>>> >> >>>> >> > transport
>>> >> >>>> >> > is working fine against the nhttp transport.
>>> >> >>>> >>
>>> >> >>>> >> To me the statement "getting transport A working
against
>>> >> >>>> >> transport
>>> >> >>>> >> B"
>>> >> >>>> >> doesn't make sense. Two distinct transports
A and B never
>>> >> >>>> >> interact
>>> >> >>>> >> directly. Each of them interacts with the
Axis2 engine through
>>> >> >>>> >> (in
>>> >> >>>> >> principle) well defined APIs. If a component
(Synapse in this
>>> >> >>>> >> case)
>>> >> >>>> >> based on Axis2 has an issue when using A and
B together, then
>>> >> >>>> >> either
>>> >> >>>> >> transport A, transport B, the component or
the Axis2 engine
>>> >> >>>> >> has an
>>> >> >>>> >> issue (or multiple components have an issue),
but saying that
>>> >> >>>> >> transport A needs to be fixed to work with
transport B doesn't
>>> >> >>>> >> make
>>> >> >>>> >> sense and is an indication that the fundamental
issue has not
>>> >> >>>> >> been
>>> >> >>>> >> identified properly.
>>> >> >>>> >>
>>> >> >>>> >> At this point, what we know is this:
>>> >> >>>> >> * NHTTP doesn't work as a transport sender
in a standard Axis2
>>> >> >>>> >> setup
>>> >> >>>> >> [1]. It only works in Synapse. That means
that from the point
>>> >> >>>> >> of
>>> >> >>>> >> view
>>> >> >>>> >> of Axis2, the NHTTP transport is broken. That
is of course OK,
>>> >> >>>> >> because
>>> >> >>>> >> NHTTP is shipped with Synapse and nobody claims
that it is
>>> >> >>>> >> supported
>>> >> >>>> >> in a plain Axis2 setup.
>>> >> >>>> >> * At some point I tried to figure out what
would need to be
>>> >> >>>> >> changed
>>> >> >>>> >> to
>>> >> >>>> >> make the NHTTP transport work in Axis2. IIRC
the conclusion
>>> >> >>>> >> was
>>> >> >>>> >> that
>>> >> >>>> >> one can make it work in Axis2, but then it
no longer works in
>>> >> >>>> >> Synapse.
>>> >> >>>> >> This would indicate that Synapse actually
uses the transport
>>> >> >>>> >> API
>>> >> >>>> >> in a
>>> >> >>>> >> way it was not designed for.
>>> >> >>>> >> * As indicated in AXIS2-4944, the current
version of
>>> >> >>>> >> NonBlockingLocalTransportSender doesn't work
in Axis2. Unless
>>> >> >>>> >> somebody
>>> >> >>>> >> can come up with a valid unit test that exercises
this piece
>>> >> >>>> >> of
>>> >> >>>> >> code,
>>> >> >>>> >> this would mean that we introduced a broken
piece of code in
>>> >> >>>> >> Axis2
>>> >> >>>> >> in
>>> >> >>>> >> order to work around another broken piece
of code in a
>>> >> >>>> >> downstream
>>> >> >>>> >> project. That is of course not OK.
>>> >> >>>> >>
>>> >> >>>> >> Note that the issue with NonBlockingLocalTransportSender
is
>>> >> >>>> >> also
>>> >> >>>> >> blocking the review of other issues such as
AXIS2-4991,
>>> >> >>>> >> because it
>>> >> >>>> >> is
>>> >> >>>> >> not possible to construct a unit test that
validates (or
>>> >> >>>> >> invalidates)
>>> >> >>>> >> the proposed patch. That is BTW a general
issue with the
>>> >> >>>> >> recent
>>> >> >>>> >> patches for the local transport. As far as
I can tell, none of
>>> >> >>>> >> them
>>> >> >>>> >> added any new unit tests.
>>> >> >>>> >>
>>> >> >>>> >> [1] At least that was my conclusion when I
last looked at it.
>>> >> >>>> >> I'm
>>> >> >>>> >> ready to retract that claim if somebody comes
up with an
>>> >> >>>> >> example
>>> >> >>>> >> that
>>> >> >>>> >> shows how to set up a simple Axis2 client
that uses NHTTP as
>>> >> >>>> >> outgoing
>>> >> >>>> >> transport.
>>> >> >>>> >
>>> >> >>>> > As Amila has pointed out earlier,
>>> >> >>>> > NonBlockingLocalTransportSender
>>> >> >>>> > is
>>> >> >>>> > used to
>>> >> >>>> > talk to a proxy service from another proxy service.
Since the
>>> >> >>>> > nhttp
>>> >> >>>> > transport is written in a non blocking manner,
>>> >> >>>> > NonBlockingLocalTransport
>>> >> >>>> > will work seamlessly against nhttp transport.
Since, we are
>>> >> >>>> > using
>>> >> >>>> > this
>>> >> >>>> > TransportSender to talk between proxy services,
it's difficult
>>> >> >>>> > to
>>> >> >>>> > come
>>> >> >>>> > up
>>> >> >>>> > with a test case (test client) for this particular
usecase.
>>> >> >>>> >
>>> >> >>>> >>
>>> >> >>>> >> > Now, my requirement is to expose an Synapse
Proxy Service
>>> >> >>>> >> > only
>>> >> >>>> >> > in
>>> >> >>>> >> > local
>>> >> >>>> >> > transport. The reason behind is that,
these proxy services
>>> >> >>>> >> > which
>>> >> >>>> >> > are
>>> >> >>>> >> > exposed
>>> >> >>>> >> > only in local transport will be used
by other proxy services
>>> >> >>>> >> > and
>>> >> >>>> >> > will
>>> >> >>>> >> > not be
>>> >> >>>> >> > available for outside parties. Earlier,
axis2 local
>>> >> >>>> >> > transport
>>> >> >>>> >> > did
>>> >> >>>> >> > not
>>> >> >>>> >> > have a
>>> >> >>>> >> > TransportListener.
>>> >> >>>> >> > With a TransportListener
>>> >> >>>> >> > ====================
>>> >> >>>> >> > I introduced [2] a TransportListener
to the local transport.
>>> >> >>>> >> > The
>>> >> >>>> >> > transport
>>> >> >>>> >> > listener's methods are used to calculate
the endpoints for
>>> >> >>>> >> > the
>>> >> >>>> >> > service
>>> >> >>>> >> > which
>>> >> >>>> >> > will be used in generating the WSDL for
the service.
>>> >> >>>> >> > Therefore,
>>> >> >>>> >> > now
>>> >> >>>> >> > if
>>> >> >>>> >> > the
>>> >> >>>> >> > service exposed in the local transport,
the local endpoint
>>> >> >>>> >> > is
>>> >> >>>> >> > also
>>> >> >>>> >> > shown
>>> >> >>>> >> > in
>>> >> >>>> >> > the WSDL. Although the local endpoints
are shown in the
>>> >> >>>> >> > WSDL,
>>> >> >>>> >> > outside
>>> >> >>>> >> > parties can not access the local endpoint.
>>> >> >>>> >> > The problem this patch introduce is,
now the WSDL shows the
>>> >> >>>> >> > local
>>> >> >>>> >> > transport
>>> >> >>>> >> > endpoints. Which is wrong since external
users can not
>>> >> >>>> >> > access
>>> >> >>>> >> > local
>>> >> >>>> >> > transport.
>>> >> >>>> >> > So the solution is not to show the local
transport endpoints
>>> >> >>>> >> > in
>>> >> >>>> >> > generated
>>> >> >>>> >> > wsdl. For that we may have to change
Axis2 code.
>>> >> >>>> >> > eg: As an example, I am attaching the
following resources to
>>> >> >>>> >> > prove
>>> >> >>>> >> > my
>>> >> >>>> >> > point.
>>> >> >>>> >> > The synapse-config.xml is the Synapse
Configuration and the
>>> >> >>>> >> > attached
>>> >> >>>> >> > WSDLs
>>> >> >>>> >> > are for the proxy servivces, LocalTransportProxy
and
>>> >> >>>> >> > SecondProxy.
>>> >> >>>> >> > The
>>> >> >>>> >> > SecondProxy is exposed only via the local
transport and the
>>> >> >>>> >> > local
>>> >> >>>> >> > endpoints
>>> >> >>>> >> > are shown in the WSDL which is wrong
IMV.
>>> >> >>>> >> > Without a TransportListener
>>> >> >>>> >> > ======================
>>> >> >>>> >> > If we did not have a LocalTransportListener
and if a service
>>> >> >>>> >> > is
>>> >> >>>> >> > exposed
>>> >> >>>> >> > through local transport only, the WSDL
for the service will
>>> >> >>>> >> > not
>>> >> >>>> >> > be
>>> >> >>>> >> > generated. The reason behind is that;
inorder to generate
>>> >> >>>> >> > the
>>> >> >>>> >> > WSDL,
>>> >> >>>> >> > there
>>> >> >>>> >> > should be a mechanism to derive the endpoints
for the
>>> >> >>>> >> > service.
>>> >> >>>> >> > Since,
>>> >> >>>> >> > the
>>> >> >>>> >> > TransportListener is not there, there
is no mechanism to
>>> >> >>>> >> > derive
>>> >> >>>> >> > the
>>> >> >>>> >> > endpoints for the service(which is only
exposed through the
>>> >> >>>> >> > local
>>> >> >>>> >> > transport).
>>> >> >>>> >> > In case the service exposed through http,https,local
>>> >> >>>> >> > transports;
>>> >> >>>> >> > this
>>> >> >>>> >> > wont
>>> >> >>>> >> > be the case. Then the WSDL will be generated
and only the
>>> >> >>>> >> > http,https
>>> >> >>>> >> > endpoints will be shown.
>>> >> >>>> >> > Without the listener, if we expose a
service only in local
>>> >> >>>> >> > transport,
>>> >> >>>> >> > WSDL
>>> >> >>>> >> > generation fails since the endpoints
can not be derived for
>>> >> >>>> >> > that
>>> >> >>>> >> > particular
>>> >> >>>> >> > service.
>>> >> >>>> >> >
>>> >> >>>> >> > Your ideas and feedback on $subject is
much appreciated.
>>> >> >>>> >> > [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2-4944
>>> >> >>>> >> > [2] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AXIS2-5043
>>> >> >>>> >> >
>>> >> >>>> >> >
>>> >> >>>> >> > --
>>> >> >>>> >> > Regards,
>>> >> >>>> >> > Heshan Suriyaarachchi
>>> >> >>>> >> >
>>> >> >>>> >> > http://heshans.blogspot.com/
>>> >> >>>> >> >
>>> >> >>>> >> >
>>> >> >>>> >> >
>>> >> >>>> >> >
>>> >> >>>> >> >
>>> >> >>>> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >> >>>> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
>>> >> >>>> >> > For additional commands, e-mail:
>>> >> >>>> >> > java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>>> >> >>>> >> >
>>> >> >>>> >>
>>> >> >>>> >>
>>> >> >>>> >>
>>> >> >>>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >> >>>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
>>> >> >>>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>>> >> >>>> >>
>>> >> >>>> >
>>> >> >>>> >
>>> >> >>>> >
>>> >> >>>> > --
>>> >> >>>> > Regards,
>>> >> >>>> > Heshan Suriyaarachchi
>>> >> >>>> >
>>> >> >>>> > http://heshans.blogspot.com/
>>> >> >>>> >
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >> >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
>>> >> >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>>> >> >>>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> --
>>> >> >>> Regards,
>>> >> >>> Heshan Suriyaarachchi
>>> >> >>>
>>> >> >>> http://heshans.blogspot.com/
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> --
>>> >> >> Amila Suriarachchi
>>> >> >> WSO2 Inc.
>>> >> >> blog: http://amilachinthaka.blogspot.com/
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >>
>>> >> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
>>> >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> >
>>> >> > --
>>> >> > Regards,
>>> >> > Heshan Suriyaarachchi
>>> >> >
>>> >> > http://heshans.blogspot.com/
>>> >> >
>>> >>
>>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
>>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Amila Suriarachchi
>>> > WSO2 Inc.
>>> > blog: http://amilachinthaka.blogspot.com/
>>> >
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Amila Suriarachchi
>> WSO2 Inc.
>> blog: http://amilachinthaka.blogspot.com/
>
>
>
> --
> Amila Suriarachchi
> WSO2 Inc.
> blog: http://amilachinthaka.blogspot.com/
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@axis.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@axis.apache.org


Mime
View raw message