ws-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Giger <gi...@apache.org>
Subject PROPOSAL to merge Rampart, CXF, swssf AssertionBuilder and Assertion classes
Date Thu, 10 Nov 2011 19:02:48 GMT
Dear WS-devs,

At the moment there are at least 4 AssertionBuilder and 3 Assertion classes per WS-Security-Policy-Assertion.
The original Rampart ones, the CXF ones lent by rampart and my classes (swssf) lent by Rampart.
All of you, which did contribute to the policy implementations, know how much time it takes
to implement 
it and how complicated it can be.

The attached patch is a first try/draft/proposal to to get rid of this overhead so that we
can use a common code base.
It is of course not intended for inclusion but to start a discussion about requirements.

The provided patch should show you
- the support of neested policies and its normalization (attached is a sample policy in compact
form 
and its normalized version which was normalized with the code in the patch)
- the simplification of the multiple Policy-Versions handling
- generic (simple) method and class to do the final assert of an alternative

The axis/rampart developers will note that the builders are using the W3C-DOM implementation
instead of the axiom framework. 
The rationale is that no additional dependencies are needed, DOM is an official standard and
we aren't in a "hot-path" 
(Normally the policy will be build once during the whole runtime). So, this shouldn't be a
big deal.

There is an alternative to the proposed concept. Build the policy without the builders and
call the concrete builders during
normalization or during other structural changes. The primitive assertion objects can be hold
behind the scene to allow
structural changes all the time.

Before I invest more time I want to make sure the asf-dev-community is in favor and the result
will be accepted.

What do you think?

I agree [ ]
I disagree [ ]
I don't care [ ]
What do you want?, it is perfect as it is! [ ]

I'm willing to help [ ]

Comments/notes/concerns/objections/ideas?

Please share your opinion!

Thanks

Marc


Mime
View raw message