Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cxf.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cxf.apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy)
From: Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org>
To: robert@gliesian.com
Subject: Re: WSDL validator tool and WS-I checks
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 10:49:51 -0500
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.6 (Linux/2.6.37; KDE/4.5.5; x86_64; ; )
Cc: dev@cxf.apache.org
References: <20110207145542.5E5BB110934@webmail1.bravehost.com>
 <201102071020.04537.dkulp@apache.org>
 <6aa73a550321d3c46bdb6a9d494059b6@127.0.0.1>
In-Reply-To: <6aa73a550321d3c46bdb6a9d494059b6@127.0.0.1>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <201102071049.51717.dkulp@apache.org>

On Monday 07 February 2011 10:39:21 am robert wrote:
> My group has a requirement to validate published WSDLs for compliance
> against the WS-I Basic Security Profile.
>=20
> Perhaps I have misunderstood the requirement, in relationship to the
> 'published' sense?  Or perhaps, the requirement could be refined
> further.

Honestly, I have no idea what the "requirement" would be.   The only place=
=20
WSDL is mentioned in the WSI-SP is in section 5.4.     All the checks in th=
ere=20
are just pointers to the BP 1.0 and 1.1 specifications.  Thus, it's really=
=20
just checking the BP.

Dan

=20
> On Mon, 7 Feb 2011 10:20:04 -0500, Daniel Kulp <dkulp@apache.org>
>=20
> wrote:
> > On Monday 07 February 2011 9:55:42 am robert wrote:
> >> Consider the online help for the WSDL validator tool:
> >> http://cxf.apache.org/docs/wsdlvalidator.html.
> >>=20
> >> The text states that the following check is performed: "Validate the
> >> WSDL document against custom validation rules, such as those defined by
> >> the Web Services Interoperability (WS-I) organization (i.e. WS-I Basic
> >> Profile rules)."
> >>=20
> >> I have two questions in this regards,
> >>=20
> >> (1)  The checks target what version of WS-I Basic Profile?  If it's
> >> not Web Services Interoperability Organization=E2=80=99s Basic Profile=
, Version
> >> 1.2, could checks be added for this latest version?
> >=20
> > It's WS-I Basic Profile..   It's not all the rules though.   I think
> > WSI-BP defines hundreds, if not thousands, of checks.   We're pretty
> > much checking for the common issues.   If someone wants to go through
> > the BP spec and write
> > additional checks, that would be great.   It's not a priority for
> > *ME* as the
> > existing checks have been fairly adequate.
> >=20
> >> (2) Are there any checks performed in relationship to "Web Services
> >> Interoperability Organization=E2=80=99s Basic Security Profile, Versio=
n 1.1"...
> >> if not, could there be?
> >=20
> > Well, the WSI-security profile defines on-the-wire rules and such.
> > It really
> > doesn't  define any rules for anything in the WSDL.   What would a *WSD=
L*
> > validator validate with this?

=2D-=20
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org
http://dankulp.com/blog