cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dan Diephouse" <...@envoisolutions.com>
Subject Re: WS-Context implementation
Date Sun, 31 Dec 2006 22:36:06 GMT
That would be very cool... :-)

On 12/30/06, Mark Little <mark.little@jboss.com> wrote:
>
> Well we have open sourced the Arjuna WS-Context implementation, which
> was used as one of the specification reference implementations for
> compliance when writing the specification. It's not in a repo yet and
> we'd like to do more work on it in bringing it up to date: the
> specification changed a bit in the latter few months. Let me check.
> Maybe we can donate it ;-) I'd like to see WS-Context used more
> widely too.
>
> Mark.
>
>
> On 20 Dec 2006, at 17:43, Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
>
> > +1 to having a CXF-based WS-Context implementation...
> >
> > IMHO this is one of the best specs in the WS space, simple and
> > powerful....Few years ago I was concerned about how to write
> > factory-based applications in the web services world...So one
> > option is to allocate a resource per every service which is not
> > acceptable for those pursuing coarser-grained approach, WS-Context
> > would help here too...Contexts do not necessarily have to be
> > transaction or security-related, they do not need to belong to
> > higher-level activities.... Something like 'orderId' is also a
> > context as it identifies a specific application activity, and as
> > such it can be passed as a WS-Context header....People can still
> > use a familiar factory pattern in the client code but under the
> > hood there'll be communicating with maximum 2 services....
> >
> > Cheers, Sergey
> >
> >
> >
> >>
> >> On 12 Oct 2006, at 20:41, Sakala, Adinarayana wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Eric and Mark,
> >>>
> >>> It would be a great opportunity for CXF community and Apache to
> >>> participate in interop testing. I wish we had a WS-Context
> >>> implementation in place :) either we wrote or somebody has given
> >>> to us
> >>> to participate in the interop testing. Certainly something to
> >>> add  to the
> >>> CXF roadmap for consideration in my opinion.
> >>>
> >>> First off, dumb question, Are there any issues with CXF
> >>> implementing or
> >>> supporting this oasis spec?
> >>
> >> No, the specifications are under a very loose IP policy: anyone
> >> can  take the specifications and provide a compliant implementation.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> I will go read more about WS-Context to understand it more, but
> >>> here are
> >>> some questions that may be worth answering.
> >>>
> >>> Are there any specs that are similar to WS-Context?
> >>
> >> No. The only thing that comes close for session management would
> >> be  WS-A and the use of ReferenceParameters. But if you check out
> >> one of  the links I sent originally, you'll see why we think this
> >> is a very  bad idea.
> >>
> >>
> >>> Can somebody comment on how this specification relates to
> >>> WS-ResourceFramework?
> >>
> >> Don't get me started on WS-RF ;-) I was one of the original
> >> supporters of that effort, but it's not a good example of SOA
> >> principles in Web Services! It's not related to WS-Context.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Is SCA planning to leverage WS-Context spec? If so, it might be
> >>> worth
> >>> opening a dialogue with Tuscany folks, so that it is mutually
> >>> beneficial
> >>> for both the projects.
> >>
> >> There has been talk about how you could do sessions and
> >> conversations  in SCA and WS-Context has come up several times as
> >> one way that is  recommended. The recent specifications reference
> >> WS-Context as well.
> >>
> >>>
> >>> How widely is this spec adopted or used in the industry? (just
> >>> curious...)
> >>
> >> It's referenced by WS-A, SCA and several groups within OASIS. The
> >> interoperability effort is the last stop before making it a
> >> standard.  It's supported by Oracle, Redhat, Fujitsu, Sun and
> >> IONA, to name a  few. But without the official backing of IBM and
> >> MSFT it's always  difficult to say in the world of Web Services ;-)
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Mark, Does RedHat have any plans on opensourcing WS-Context
> >>> implementation?
> >>
> >> Yes. It's already open sourced in that there is an older version
> >> covered by LGPL. However, it's not in any repository yet.
> >>
> >>> Asking this question because, there is no point in creating one
> >>> if  reuse
> >>> is a possibility. I am sure CXF community would love to get one :)
> >>
> >> Understood. However, I believe the rules in Apache would preclude
> >> a  dependency on any non-Apache licence code. True?
> >>
> >> Mark.
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Regards,
> >>> Adi
> >>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Newcomer, Eric
> >>>> Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 12:57 PM
> >>>> To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>>> Subject: RE: WS-Context implementation
> >>>>
> >>>> Sorry - forgot to also mention the potential interest from SCA
> >>>> and/or
> >>>> Tuscany in the use of WS-Context for a way in which to manage
> >>> persistent
> >>>> sessions for Web services.
> >>>>
> >>>> Eric
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Newcomer, Eric
> >>>> Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 12:51 PM
> >>>> To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>>> Subject: RE: WS-Context implementation
> >>>>
> >>>> As co-chair of the OASIS WS-CAF committee I'd like to mention the
> >>>> opportunity for CXF to participate in the interop testing for
> >>>> the  most
> >>>> recent version of the WS-Context specification, found on the TC
> >>>> page
> >>>> (the link in Mark's email) as part of its progression toward OASIS
> >>>> standard.
> >>>>
> >>>> Eric
> >>>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: Mark Little [mailto:mark.little@jboss.com]
> >>>> Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 7:24 AM
> >>>> To: cxf-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >>>> Subject: WS-Context implementation
> >>>>
> >>>> Has anyone considered doing a WS-Context (http://www.oasis-
> >>>> open.org/
> >>>> committees/download.php/19659/WS-Context.zip) implementation for
> >>>> CXF?
> >>>> There's a pretty good write-up on it and its relationship to WS-A
> >>>> here
> >>> http://www.idealliance.org/proceedings/xml05/abstracts/paper54.HTML
> >>>>
> >>>> Mark.
> >
>
>


-- 
Dan Diephouse
Envoi Solutions
http://envoisolutions.com | http://netzooid.com/blog

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message