cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Creation of empty detail elements for SOAPFaults
Date Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:42:26 GMT

Honestly, I think both things should be done.   We definitely  
shouldn't be creating details where one doesn't exist and isn't  
needed.   And hasDetails should definitely not return true if there  
aren't details.

Dan


On Jul 26, 2008, at 11:05 AM, Glen Mazza wrote:

>
> Team,
>
> I'm trying to get CXF to work with WSS4J for signature/encryption  
> right now.
> I got the following error message back from WSS4J:
>
> <soap:Envelope xmlns:soap="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/">
> <soap:Body>
> <soap:Fault>
> <faultcode>soap:Client</faultcode>
> <faultstring>WSSECURITY_EX</faultstring>
> </soap:Fault>
> </soap:Body>
> </soap:Envelope>
>
> Partial error stack that produced that message:
> [INFO] Exception in thread "main"  
> javax.xml.ws.soap.SOAPFaultException:
> WSSECURITY_EX
> [INFO] 	at
> org.apache.cxf.jaxws.JaxWsClientProxy.invoke(JaxWsClientProxy.java: 
> 218)
> [INFO] 	at $Proxy27.doubleIt(Unknown Source)
> [INFO] 	at
> com.mycompany.webservice.client.WSClient.doubleIt(WSClient.java:26)
> [INFO] 	at  
> com.mycompany.webservice.client.WSClient.main(WSClient.java:19)
> [INFO] Caused by: org.apache.cxf.binding.soap.SoapFault: WSSECURITY_EX
> [INFO] 	at
> org 
> .apache 
> .cxf 
> .binding 
> .soap 
> .interceptor 
> .Soap11FaultInInterceptor 
> .handleMessage(Soap11FaultInInterceptor.java:70)
> [INFO] 	at
> org 
> .apache 
> .cxf 
> .binding 
> .soap 
> .interceptor 
> .Soap11FaultInInterceptor 
> .handleMessage(Soap11FaultInInterceptor.java:35)
> [INFO] 	at
> org 
> .apache 
> .cxf 
> .phase.PhaseInterceptorChain.doIntercept(PhaseInterceptorChain.java: 
> 221)
>
> The error message I'm getting is not my concern right now--it is  
> what CXF
> appears to be doing to it.  It seems(*) that CXF is placing an empty  
> Detail
> element within this SOAPFault response.  This triggers the
> SOAPFault.hasDetail() method to be true, which causes users to need  
> to write
> additional code to parse through the Detail's nonexistent
> DetailElements--which is annoying once it turns out there's no  
> DetailEntries
> to parse.
>
> The culprit seems to be org.apache.cxf.interceptor.Fault's
> getOrCreateDetail() method, which is called by various other  
> interceptors to
> create Detail objects where there are actually no DetailEntries. Can  
> we
> avoid doing this?  I would say either of two things should be done:  
> (1)  not
> to create empty Detail objects if there are no DetailEntries (either  
> when
> parsing SOAP error messages coming in externally, or when a CXF web  
> service
> provider is sending back an error message), or (2) redefine
> Fault.hasDetails() to mean that the SOAPFault has a Details object  
> *and* has
> DetailEntries under it.  Currently, the above XML SOAP response should
> return false for hasDetails(), but it's returning TRUE because of  
> the empty
> Detail element being created.
>
> Another problem with artificial creation of SOAPFault Detail  
> elements is
> that their absence or presence has semantic value according to the  
> SOAP
> spec[2]:
>
> "The detail element is intended for carrying application specific  
> error
> information related to the Body element. It MUST be present if the  
> contents
> of the Body element could not be successfully processed. It MUST NOT  
> be used
> to carry information about error information belonging to header  
> entries.
> Detailed error information belonging to header entries MUST be carried
> within header entries.
>
> The absence of the detail element in the Fault element indicates  
> that the
> fault is not related to processing of the Body element. This can be  
> used to
> distinguish whether the Body element was processed or not in case of  
> a fault
> situation."
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Thanks,
> Glen
>
> (*) I'm saying "seems" because I'm relying on the XML response I see  
> in
> Wireshark and the fact that hasDetails() is returning TRUE-- 
> indicating a
> Details object was created.
>
> [1] http://java.sun.com/javaee/5/docs/api/javax/xml/soap/ 
> SOAPFault.html
> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/NOTE-SOAP-20000508/#_Toc478383507
> -- 
> View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Creation-of-empty-detail-elements-for-SOAPFaults-tp18667733p18667733.html
> Sent from the cxf-dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>

---
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org
http://www.dankulp.com/blog





Mime
View raw message