cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Little <mark.lit...@jboss.com>
Subject Re: WS-Context implementation
Date Sat, 30 Dec 2006 16:25:22 GMT
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.
>


Mime
View raw message