cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Kulp <>
Subject Re: WS-Addressing : dealing with ReplyTo address set to none
Date Fri, 03 Sep 2010 17:03:09 GMT
On Friday 03 September 2010 12:13:48 pm Sergey Beryozkin wrote:
> Hi
> I've attached a patch to
> to do with returning a fault in case of ReplyTo address set to none.
> It appears 202 status is expected but a related JAXWS TCK test actually
> expects a fault.
> CXF treats a none address as a generic (nearly as an anonymous) address
> which is not a problem
> in cases when a restriction is applied that only non-anonymous addresses
> are expected.
> But if an anonymous address is expected then treating none as if was an
> anonymous address is problematic.
> However, it does seem to me now that indeed returning 202 seems equally
> problematic. Why would anyone ever event want to emulate a oneway request
> by setting a reply to address to none and then executing a two way request
> ? Probably JAXWS TCK is correct here after all on expecting a fault
> instead.
> Let me know if you have any concerns re the proposed fix, I reckon it's ok
> to go
The ONLY use case I can think of is if the client really doesn't care about 
the response at all, fault or not.   But I really think it's a relatively 
bogus use case so your fix is fine by me.

Daniel Kulp

View raw message