[jira] Commented: (WSCOMMONS-456) Supporting SMTP transport for RM

["Andreas Veithen (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WSCOMMONS-456?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12694016#action_12694016 ] 

Andreas Veithen commented on WSCOMMONS-456:
-------------------------------------------

I have one concern with generating a new ID for the message sent out: in principle it should be possible to use the mail transport with asynchronous responses without WS-Addressing. The reason is that SMTP defines a set of headers that is rich enough (in particular In-Reply-To) to do message correlation. Asynchronous request-response is not yet supported by the mail transport and probably the Axis2 client API won't let you  do it unless WS-Addressing is enabled, but we should keep the option of implementing this. However this will only be possible if the SMTP message ID is the same as the Axis2 message ID.

> Supporting SMTP transport for RM
> --------------------------------
>
>                 Key: WSCOMMONS-456
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/WSCOMMONS-456
>             Project: WS-Commons
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Amila Chinthaka Suriarachchi
>         Attachments: patch.txt
>
>
> I recently had some tests for smtp RM support. With the following changes and couple of changes to Sandesha2 trunk I was able to make it working. Here are the smtp transport changes required.
> 1. removing using of same message ID for mail message.
> 2. Setting a RequestResponse transport object and set the status as wait.
> This is the same issue I saw in supporting synapse NIO transport as well.
> Sandesha2 SenderWorker.java 191 has the following code. 
> if (t==null) {
> 				if (op != null)
> 					inMsg = op.getMessageContext(WSDLConstants.MESSAGE_LABEL_IN_VALUE);
> 				if (inMsg != null)
> 					t = (RequestResponseTransport) inMsg.getProperty(RequestResponseTransport.TRANSPORT_CONTROL);
> 			}
> 			// If we are anonymous, and this is not a makeConnection, then we must have a transport waiting
> 			if((toEPR==null || toEPR.hasAnonymousAddress()) &&
> 			   (makeConnection == null || !makeConnection.booleanValue()) &&
> 			   (t == null || !t.getStatus().equals(RequestResponseTransportStatus.WAITING))) {
> 				
> 				// Mark this sender bean so that we know that the transport is unavailable, if the
> 				// bean is still stored.
> 				SenderBean bean = senderBeanMgr.retrieve(senderBean.getMessageID());
> 				if(bean != null && bean.isTransportAvailable()) {
> 					bean.setTransportAvailable(false);
> 					senderBeanMgr.update(bean);
> 				}
> 				
> 				// Commit the update
> 				if(transaction != null && transaction.isActive()) transaction.commit();
> 				transaction = null;
> 				
> 				if (log.isDebugEnabled())
> 					log.debug("Exit: SenderWorker::run, no response transport for anonymous message");
> 				return;
> 			}
> to send a response message this code assumes a RequestResponseTransport object and its state is waiting. 
> So I had to add a new MailRequestResponseTransport class and set it to message context at the receiver. 
> will attach the patch.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.