You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cxf.apache.org by Andrei Shakirin <as...@talend.com> on 2012/01/27 17:38:41 UTC
Support multiple policy interceptor providers per policy assertion
Hi,
At the moment policy mechanism is very powerful, but have some limitations. One of them is that it is possible to register only one InterceptorProvider for one policy assertion.
PolicyInterceptorProviderRegistry interface extends Regsitry as:
public interface PolicyInterceptorProviderRegistry
extends Registry<QName, PolicyInterceptorProvider> {
...
I see some use cases where PolicyInterceptorProvider(s) are independent, but associated with the same policy assertion (for example in complex authentication case).
Proposal: extend PolicyInterceptorProviderRegistry to save set of PolicyInterceptorProvider for one assertion.
If proposal is accepted I will provide patch.
Jira issue is already created: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-4073.
Regards,
Andrei.
Re: Support multiple policy interceptor providers per policy assertion
Posted by Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>.
On Monday, January 30, 2012 9:21:58 AM Andrei Shakirin wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
> 2.6.0 is definitely OK for me.
> Backport to 2.5.x can be difficult, because one class in api package should
> be changed to support it:
>
> public interface PolicyInterceptorProviderRegistry extends Registry<QName,
> PolicyInterceptorProvider> to public interface
> PolicyInterceptorProviderRegistry extends Registry<QName,
> Set<PolicyInterceptorProvider>>
Yea. That's kind of what I expected. If it's just for 2.6, then that's
perfect. Send a patch!
Dan
>
> Regards,
> Andrei.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:dkulp@apache.org]
> Sent: 27 January 2012 22:16
> To: dev@cxf.apache.org
> Cc: Andrei Shakirin
> Subject: Re: Support multiple policy interceptor providers per policy
> assertion
> On Friday, January 27, 2012 4:38:41 PM Andrei Shakirin wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > At the moment policy mechanism is very powerful, but have some
> > limitations.
> > One of them is that it is possible to register only one
> > InterceptorProvider for one policy assertion.
> >
> > PolicyInterceptorProviderRegistry interface extends Regsitry as:
> >
> > public interface PolicyInterceptorProviderRegistry extends
> > Registry<QName, PolicyInterceptorProvider> {
> >
> > ...
> >
> > I see some use cases where PolicyInterceptorProvider(s) are
> > independent, but associated with the same policy assertion (for
> > example in complex authentication case).
> >
> > Proposal: extend PolicyInterceptorProviderRegistry to save set of
> > PolicyInterceptorProvider for one assertion. If proposal is accepted I
> > will provide patch.
>
> Sure. Definitely for 2.6.0. I'd have to see that patch to see how
> applicable it would be to backport to 2.5.x. Is this something that would
> be needed for 2.5.x or can we pursue this just for 2.6? The policy stuff
> has moved around (to resolve split packages) so backporting stuff may be a
> bit difficult (but not impossible).
>
> Dan
>
> > Jira issue is already created:
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-4073.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Andrei.
>
> --
> Daniel Kulp
> dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog Talend Community Coder -
> http://coders.talend.com
--
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog
Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
RE: Support multiple policy interceptor providers per policy
assertion
Posted by Andrei Shakirin <as...@talend.com>.
Hi Dan,
2.6.0 is definitely OK for me.
Backport to 2.5.x can be difficult, because one class in api package should be changed to support it:
public interface PolicyInterceptorProviderRegistry extends Registry<QName, PolicyInterceptorProvider> to public interface PolicyInterceptorProviderRegistry extends Registry<QName, Set<PolicyInterceptorProvider>>
Regards,
Andrei.
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:dkulp@apache.org]
Sent: 27 January 2012 22:16
To: dev@cxf.apache.org
Cc: Andrei Shakirin
Subject: Re: Support multiple policy interceptor providers per policy assertion
On Friday, January 27, 2012 4:38:41 PM Andrei Shakirin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> At the moment policy mechanism is very powerful, but have some limitations.
> One of them is that it is possible to register only one
> InterceptorProvider for one policy assertion.
>
> PolicyInterceptorProviderRegistry interface extends Regsitry as:
>
> public interface PolicyInterceptorProviderRegistry extends
> Registry<QName, PolicyInterceptorProvider> {
>
> ...
>
> I see some use cases where PolicyInterceptorProvider(s) are
> independent, but associated with the same policy assertion (for
> example in complex authentication case).
>
> Proposal: extend PolicyInterceptorProviderRegistry to save set of
> PolicyInterceptorProvider for one assertion. If proposal is accepted I
> will provide patch.
Sure. Definitely for 2.6.0. I'd have to see that patch to see how
applicable it would be to backport to 2.5.x. Is this something that would
be needed for 2.5.x or can we pursue this just for 2.6? The policy stuff
has moved around (to resolve split packages) so backporting stuff may be a bit difficult (but not impossible).
Dan
>
> Jira issue is already created:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-4073.
>
> Regards,
> Andrei.
--
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
RE: Support multiple policy interceptor providers per policy
assertion
Posted by Andrei Shakirin <as...@talend.com>.
Hi Dan,
Patch is attached to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-4073.
Regards,
Andrei.
-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Kulp [mailto:dkulp@apache.org]
Sent: 27 January 2012 22:16
To: dev@cxf.apache.org
Cc: Andrei Shakirin
Subject: Re: Support multiple policy interceptor providers per policy assertion
On Friday, January 27, 2012 4:38:41 PM Andrei Shakirin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> At the moment policy mechanism is very powerful, but have some limitations.
> One of them is that it is possible to register only one
> InterceptorProvider for one policy assertion.
>
> PolicyInterceptorProviderRegistry interface extends Regsitry as:
>
> public interface PolicyInterceptorProviderRegistry extends
> Registry<QName, PolicyInterceptorProvider> {
>
> ...
>
> I see some use cases where PolicyInterceptorProvider(s) are
> independent, but associated with the same policy assertion (for
> example in complex authentication case).
>
> Proposal: extend PolicyInterceptorProviderRegistry to save set of
> PolicyInterceptorProvider for one assertion. If proposal is accepted I
> will provide patch.
Sure. Definitely for 2.6.0. I'd have to see that patch to see how
applicable it would be to backport to 2.5.x. Is this something that would
be needed for 2.5.x or can we pursue this just for 2.6? The policy stuff
has moved around (to resolve split packages) so backporting stuff may be a bit difficult (but not impossible).
Dan
>
> Jira issue is already created:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-4073.
>
> Regards,
> Andrei.
--
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
Re: Support multiple policy interceptor providers per policy assertion
Posted by Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>.
On Friday, January 27, 2012 4:38:41 PM Andrei Shakirin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> At the moment policy mechanism is very powerful, but have some limitations.
> One of them is that it is possible to register only one InterceptorProvider
> for one policy assertion.
>
> PolicyInterceptorProviderRegistry interface extends Regsitry as:
>
> public interface PolicyInterceptorProviderRegistry
> extends Registry<QName, PolicyInterceptorProvider> {
>
> ...
>
> I see some use cases where PolicyInterceptorProvider(s) are independent, but
> associated with the same policy assertion (for example in complex
> authentication case).
>
> Proposal: extend PolicyInterceptorProviderRegistry to save set of
> PolicyInterceptorProvider for one assertion. If proposal is accepted I will
> provide patch.
Sure. Definitely for 2.6.0. I'd have to see that patch to see how
applicable it would be to backport to 2.5.x. Is this something that would
be needed for 2.5.x or can we pursue this just for 2.6? The policy stuff
has moved around (to resolve split packages) so backporting stuff may be a bit
difficult (but not impossible).
Dan
>
> Jira issue is already created:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-4073.
>
> Regards,
> Andrei.
--
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog
Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com