cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Status of WS-RM
Date Mon, 29 Nov 2010 17:16:07 GMT
On Friday 26 November 2010 5:56:27 am Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
> Relating to this same issue of the WS-RM status, does the current code
> handle interactions with WS-Security? In particular, I'm wondering what
> happens if you're using timestamps with signing - does the WS-RM code
> generate a new timestamp (and signature) when it resends the message, or
> just resend the entire original message with the original timestamp?

I believe it will just resend the  original message.   The WS-RM stuff I think 
just stores the message as  a byte[] and resends it "as is".   Not 100% sure 
though.

Dan

 
> Thanks,
> 
>   - Dennis
> 
> Dennis M. Sosnoski
> Java SOA and Web Services Consulting <http://www.sosnoski.com/consult.html>
> Axis2/CXF/Metro SOA and Web Services Training
> <http://www.sosnoski.com/training.html>
> Web Services Jump-Start <http://www.sosnoski.com/jumpstart.html>
> 
> On 11/17/2010 02:58 AM, Aki Yoshida wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 8:21 PM, Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org> wrote:
> >> On Monday 15 November 2010 12:05:56 pm Scott Came wrote:
> >>> Thanks, Daniel.
> >>> What about the potential to leverage Sandesha or the implementation in
> >>> Metro?  My research has indicated that some time ago there was
> >>> discussion about trying to create a reusable RM library that could do
> >>> the job (with adaptation) across the various open source
> >>> implementations of WS-*.  While it seems that never went anywhere
> >>> (probably with good reason) should I have any hope of reusing
> >>> significant chunks of code from either of those efforts?
> >> 
> >> Well, for Sandesha, I haven't looked at the code there at all so I don't
> >> know how reasonable it is to reuse chunks of it.   For WS-SecPol, I did
> >> use the Rampart code as a base, but it pretty much ended up as a
> >> complete re-write by the time I was done with it.   Sandesha might be
> >> in the same ball park.
> > 
> > It would be nice to share some part of the implementation to save the
> > development and maintenance cost.
> > But I also have a feeling that using Sandesha won't be a shorter path
> > to support WS-RM 1.1 in CXF.
> > 
> > I am looking into some other issues of the current 1.0 implementation
> > but I am also interested in this question of going for 1.1.
> > 
> > Regards, Aki

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

Mime
View raw message