You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cxf.apache.org by Dennis Sosnoski <dm...@sosnoski.com> on 2011/09/09 06:25:37 UTC
Re: a quesiton on CXF 2.5 WS-RM's protocol variation handling
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<dm...@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
>
Re: a quesiton on CXF 2.5 WS-RM's protocol variation handling
Posted by Dennis Sosnoski <dm...@sosnoski.com>.
Sounds good to me on both of these.
- Dennis
On 09/09/2011 08:29 PM, Aki Yoshida wrote:
> 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<dm...@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<dm...@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
>>>
Re: a quesiton on CXF 2.5 WS-RM's protocol variation handling
Posted by Aki Yoshida <el...@googlemail.com>.
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 <dm...@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<dm...@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
>>
>