geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alan D. Cabrera" <>
Subject RE: Interceptors
Date Mon, 01 Dec 2003 17:01:07 GMT
I was thinking the same thing that you were, EJBSecurityInterceptor
should be moved to OpenEJB.  I think that we should avoid bringing in
OpenEJB interfaces back into Geronimo, if we can help it.

I am entertaining the idea that containers can provide their own
pluggable PolcyContextFactories.  Theses PolicyContexts would be highly
optimized for their containers, e.g. OpenEJB PolcyContexts would use
bitvecs for their permission checks.

I've been holding off on this while our discussions, Jan and I,
progress.  I'm kind of thinking that there may be a way to use this
pluggable PolcyContextFactory to satisfy Jan's concerns about dynamic


-----Original Message-----
From:	Jeremy Boynes
Sent:	Mon 12/1/2003 11:18 AM
Subject:	Re: Interceptors
Alan D. Cabrera wrote:

> It seems that there have been some substantial changes in this area.
> What are the plans on completing this work?  What do I need to do to
> upgrade my interceptors?
> Regards,
> Alan

Alan - apologies, I made the changes to the security interceptor and 
meant to finish, then got cut off from my computer.

The reason this proved more complex than the other interceptors is that 
it mixes Geronimo code with EJB specific functionality from OpenEJB. 
This needs a careful choice of which interfaces should be defined by 
Geronimo and which by OpenEJB.

My current thinking is that EJBSecurityInterceptor should be moved to 
OpenEJB, leaving the security implementation in Geronimo but placing the

hook for EJBs in OpenEJB.

The alternative would be to bring interfaces like EJBInvocation, 
EJBInstanceContext and TransactionContext into Geronimo. The downside to

this though is that some of these are specific to the OpenEJB 
implementation and are not suitably generic.



View raw message