cxf-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aki Yoshida <elak...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: a quesiton on CXF 2.5 WS-RM's protocol variation handling
Date Fri, 09 Sep 2011 08:29:58 GMT
Hi Dennis,
okay. Thanks. I will check it out.

I am also thinking about introducing a few request runtime properties
to control some of the RM behavior.

- Marking the message as the last message
- Setting the replyTo of the createSequence to the anonymous endpoint
for a decoupled case (Currently, both replyTo and ackTo are
automatically set to the decoupled endpoint. Consequently, the
CreateSequenceResponse is sent to the decouple endpoint. This is fine,
but I think we should offer an option to get this synchronous
CreateSequenceResponse on the http response directly).
- Generalizing this replyTo/ackTo runtime setting to set ackTo to the
anonymous endpoint and replyTo to the decoupled endpoint.

There are very old jira tickets about these aspects (CXF-348, CXF-374).

regards, aki


2011/9/9 Dennis Sosnoski <dms@sosnoski.com>:
> Hi Aki,
>
> I added the test code to verify proper server-side handling of different
> protocol variations (http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1166927&view=rev) so
> if you want to try changing how RMEndpoint works, go ahead.
>
>  - Dennis
>
>
> On 08/25/2011 05:30 PM, Dennis Sosnoski wrote:
>>
>> On 08/18/2011 11:32 PM, Aki Yoshida wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Dennis,
>>>
>>> 2011/8/17 Dennis Sosnoski<dms@sosnoski.com>:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Aki,
>>>>
>>>> On 08/18/2011 09:25 AM, Aki Yoshida wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> ...
>>>>>
>>>>> RMManager now manages endpoints under each supported protocol
>>>>> variation using Map<ProtocolVariation, Map<Endpoint, RMEndpoint>>.
>>>>> Does this mean that an Endpoint can be used in several protocol
>>>>> variations?
>>>>
>>>> Yes. I decided to take this approach because I wanted the WS-RM
>>>> serverside code to automatically adjust to whichever variation a client
>>>> uses in the request, while allowing other clients to use other
>>>> variations.
>>>
>>> Okay. it makes sense. But could this multi-version support at the
>>> sequence level so that you still have one RMEndpoint per Endpoint? One
>>> RMEndpoint can respond to the create sequence message from various
>>> clients using different versions and create each sequence bound to be
>>> used for a specific version. So this will also work, no?
>>
>> I had originally looked at doing something along these lines. I think I
>> ran into problems in handling outgoing messages, but from a look at
>> RMOutInterceptor I'd think it'd be possible to work around any issues.
>>
>> I'll add some systests to assure that the code responds correctly to
>> different protocol variations (which it does, at present). That way you
>> can try this change and make sure nothing breaks.
>>
>>   - Dennis
>>
>

Mime
View raw message