You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to java-dev@axis.apache.org by to...@apache.org on 2005/01/27 10:42:15 UTC
cvs commit: ws-axis/site/src4forrest-060/java/src/documentation/content/xdocs/docs CachingEarlDraft2.xml F2F-2.xml ms-interop.xml SOAPVerse.xml
toshi 2005/01/27 01:42:15
Added: site/src4forrest-060/java/src/documentation/content/xdocs/docs
CachingEarlDraft2.xml F2F-2.xml ms-interop.xml
SOAPVerse.xml
Log:
Migration for Forrest 0.6
Revision Changes Path
1.1 ws-axis/site/src4forrest-060/java/src/documentation/content/xdocs/docs/CachingEarlDraft2.xml
Index: CachingEarlDraft2.xml
===================================================================
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE document PUBLIC "-//APACHE//DTD Documentation V1.2//EN" "./dtd/document-v12.dtd">
<document>
<header>
<title>WebServices - Axis</title>
</header>
<body>
<section>
<title>WebServices - Axis - Caching Early Draft</title>
<p>
<TABLE border="0" WIDTH="100%" cellspacing="80">
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="CENTER">
<H1>
Draft Proposal of<br/>
Caching Mechanism for Axis<br/>
as a JAX-RPC runtime system<br/>
</H1>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="CENTER">
<H2>
Early draft 2<br/>
25 Aug, 2003
</H2>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR>
<TD ALIGN="CENTER">
<H2>
Toshiyuki Kimura<br/>
Apache Axis Committer<br/>
toshi@apache.org
</H2>
</TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>
<hr/>
<TABLE WIDTH="100%">
<TR><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">Copyright © 2003 Toshiyuki Kimura</TD></TR>
<TR><TD ALIGN="LEFT" id="page2">- Page 2 -</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
<H2>Table of Contents</H2>
<P>
<TABLE BORDER="0" cellspacing="20">
<TR>
<TD>
<a href="#section1">1. INTRODUCTION</a><br/>
<a href="#section1.1">1.1 DESIGN GOALS</a><br/>
<a href="#section1.2">1.2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS</a><br/>
<a href="#section1.3">1.3 STATUS</a><br/>
<a href="#section1.4">1.4 NOTATIONAL CONVENTIONS</a><br/>
<a href="#section2">2. CACHING MECHANISM USECASE</a><br/>
<a href="#section2.1">2.1 WEATHER FORECAST SERVICE</a><br/>
<a href="#section2.1.1">2.1.1 Service Description</a><br/>
<a href="#section2.1.2">2.1.2 Service Use</a><br/>
<a href="#section2.2">2.2 CACHING MECHANISMS</a><br/>
<a href="#section2.2.1">2.2.1 Service Client</a><br/>
<a href="#section2.2.2">2.2.2 Server Side</a><br/>
<a href="#section3">3. REQUIREMENTS</a><br/>
<a href="#section4">4. REFERENCE</a><br/>
<a href="#section5">5. APPENDIX: PROTOTYPE OF CACHING MECHANISM</a><br/>
<a href="#section6">6. APPENDIX: SAMPLE APPLICATION</a><br/>
<a href="#section7">7. APPENDIX: UNRESOLVED ISSUES</a><br/>
</TD>
<TD>
<a href="#page3">------ 3<br/></a>
<a href="#page3">------ 3<br/></a>
<a href="#page3">------ 3<br/></a>
<a href="#page3">------ 3<br/></a>
<a href="#page3">------ 3<br/></a>
<a href="#page4">------ 4<br/></a>
<a href="#page4">------ 4<br/></a>
<a href="#page4">------ 4<br/></a>
<a href="#page5">------ 5<br/></a>
<a href="#page5">------ 5<br/></a>
<a href="#page5">------ 5<br/></a>
<a href="#page6">------ 6<br/></a>
<a href="#page7">------ 7<br/></a>
<a href="#page7">------ 7<br/></a>
<a href="#page8">------ 8<br/></a>
<a href="#page8">------ 8<br/></a>
<a href="#page9">------ 9<br/></a>
</TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>
</P>
<HR id="page3"/>
<TABLE WIDTH="100%">
<TR><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">Copyright © 2003 Toshiyuki Kimura</TD></TR>
<TR><TD ALIGN="LEFT">- Page 3 -</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
<H1 id="section1">1. Introduction</H1>
<DIV>
<p>
At the present time, SOAP is actually famous as a transport-independent protocol. But in fact,
HTTP protocol is the leading binding of SOAP implementations. In addition, a lot of JAX-RPC
implementations use the HTTP POST method for invoking Web Services based on SOAP 1.1
specification. The HTTP POST method is specified in HTTP 1.0 specification (RFC 1945) as
uncacheable. Because of this, SOAP is also uncacheable in the present situation.</p>
<p>
This document proposes a set of APIs for JAX-RPC and Messaging styles to enable the cache
control mechanism in various SOAP implementations.
</p>
</DIV>
<H2 id="section1.1">1.1 Design Goals</H2>
<DIV>
The goals of this document are as follows:<br/>
<UL>
<LI>Specify APIs for supporting Caching Mechanism for both Server side and Client side on the
Java platform. Caching Mechanism includes 'Enable/Disable Cache', 'Validate Cache',
'Reload Control', and 'Invalidate Cached Data'.</LI>
<LI>Define protocol-bindings independent of Caching Mechanism for SOAP Messages</LI>
<LI>Support both HTTP POST method and HTTP GET method as cacheable protocol bindings
for SOAP Messaging</LI>
<LI>Support interoperability across heterogeneous platforms and environments</LI>
<LI>Support conformance and interoperability requirements that are testable for an
implementation of this proposal</LI>
</UL>
<H2 id="section1.2">1.2 Acknowledgments</H2>
Satoshi Koyama, Takayuki Nagakura, Kenji Suzuki, and Masashi Takeichi (all from NTT DATA
corporation and its business partners) have provided precious technical input to this document.
<H2 id="section1.3">1.3 Status</H2>
This document is the early draft version of the proposal.
<H2 id="section1.4">1.4 Notational Conventions</H2>
<UL>
<LI>Diagrams follow the standard UML notation</LI>
<LI>Code snippets are not shown in complete form. Refer to the Java docs for complete and
detailed description.</LI>
<LI>Examples are illustrative (non-prescriptive)</LI>
</UL>
</DIV>
<HR id="page4"/>
<TABLE WIDTH="100%">
<TR><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">Copyright © 2003 Toshiyuki Kimura</TD></TR>
<TR><TD ALIGN="LEFT">- Page 4 -</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
<H1 id="section2">2. Caching Mechanism Usecase</H1>
This chapter describes use cases for the Cashing model in a non-prescriptive manner. Later
chapters of this document specify requirements and APIs in a prescriptive manner.
<H2 id="section2.1">2.1 Weather Forecast Service</H2>
<DIV>
The following description uses a weather forecast service example to illustrate Caching
Mechanism concepts.
</DIV>
<DIV ALIGN="CENTER">
<img src="images/image2-1.gif"/>
</DIV>
<H2 id="section2.1.1">2.1.1 Service Description</H2>
<DIV>
The WeatherForecastService endpoint defines and implements the following Java interface.
</DIV>
<B>Code Example: Interface of WeatherForecastService</B>
<BLOCKQUOTE>
package com.example;<br/>
public interface WeatherForecastProvider extends java.rmi.Remote {<br/>
int getChanceOfRain ( String areaSymbol ) throws java.rmi.RemoteException;<br/>
// ...<br/>
}<br/>
</BLOCKQUOTE>
The WeatherForecastService has the following features to note:
<UL>
<LI>It returns a chance of rain for the specified area.</LI>
<LI>It forecasts chance of rain from observation data which is provided every 3 hours.</LI>
<LI>The chance of rain won't be changed until the next update of observation data, even though
a client has frequently access to the service.</LI>
</UL>
<hr/>
<TABLE WIDTH="100%" id="page5">
<TR><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">Copyright © 2003 Toshiyuki Kimura</TD></TR>
<TR><TD ALIGN="LEFT">- Page 5 -</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
<H2 id="section2.1.2">2.1.2 Service Use</H2>
<DIV>
A service client uses a JAX-RPC service by invoking remote methods on a service endpoint.
The following diagram shows how a service client uses JAX-RPC runtime and Caching
Mechanism.
</DIV>
<DIV ALIGN="CENTER">
<img src="images/image2-1-2.gif"/>
</DIV>
<H2 id="section2.2">2.2 Caching Mechanisms</H2>
<DIV>
This section describes an overview of Caching Mechanisms.
</DIV>
<H2 id="section2.2.1">2.2.1 Service Client</H2>
<DIV>
The following use case diagram shows how a client-side JAX-RPC runtime system uses local
cached data which is stored by Caching Mechanisms.
</DIV>
<DIV ALIGN="CENTER">
<img src="images/image2-2-1.gif"/>
</DIV>
<HR id="page6"/>
<TABLE WIDTH="100%">
<TR><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">Copyright © 2003 Toshiyuki Kimura</TD></TR>
<TR><TD ALIGN="LEFT">- Page 6 -</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
<H2 id="section2.2.2">2.2.2 Server Side</H2>
<DIV>
The diagram shows how a server-side JAX-RPC runtime system informs that a response
message is cacheable to the service client.
</DIV>
<DIV ALIGN="CENTER">
<img src="images/image2-2-2.gif"/>
</DIV>
<HR id="page7"/>
<TABLE WIDTH="100%">
<TR><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">Copyright © 2003 Toshiyuki Kimura</TD></TR>
<TR><TD ALIGN="LEFT">- Page 7 -</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
<H1 id="section3">3. Requirements</H1>
<DIV>
This chapter specifies the proposed scope and requirements for the 1.0 version of Caching
Mechanisms. These requirements will be described in more depth in the later chapters.
</DIV>
<B>R01 Protocol Bindings</B>
<UL>
The goal of this document is to enable support for multiple protocol bindings. SOAP 1.1
specification [1] provides a sample for using SOAP in HTTP protocol [4] with HTTP POST
methods. An extended version, SOAP 1.2 [2] adds a scenario by using HTTP GET methods.
<B>Note:</B> HTTP 1.0 [3] does not allow caching for HTTP POST methods, however HTTP 1.1 adds
some additional rules to enable caching mechanisms for HTTP POST methods.
</UL>
<B>R02 Transport</B>
<UL>
As a minimum this caching mechanism is required to support HTTP 1.1 as the transport for
SOAP message. HTTP binding for the SOAP message is based on the SOAP 1.1 specification
[1].
</UL>
<H1 id="section4">4. Reference</H1>
<UL>
<LI>[1] W3C Note: SOAP 1.1: <link href="http://www.w3c.org./TR/SOAP/">http://www.w3c.org./TR/SOAP/</link></LI>
<LI>[2] W3C: SOAP 1.2: <link href="http://www.w3c.org/TR/soap12/">http://www.w3c.org/TR/soap12/</link></LI>
<LI>[3] HTTP 1.0 <link href="http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc1945/rfc1945">http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc1945/rfc1945</link></LI>
<LI>[4] HTTP 1.1: <link href="http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616">http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616</link></LI>
</UL>
<HR id="page8"/>
<TABLE WIDTH="100%">
<TR><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">Copyright © 2003 Toshiyuki Kimura</TD></TR>
<TR><TD ALIGN="LEFT">- Page 8 -</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
<H1 id="section5">5. Appendix: Prototype of Caching mechanism</H1>
<DIV>
In order to demonstrate the feasibility of Caching Mechanisms, I made a prototype of a cache
controller which provides a local cache on the service client side.
</DIV>
<DIV ALIGN="CENTER">
<img src="images/image5.gif"/>
</DIV>
<DIV>
The hatched areas indicate the extended modules for Apache Axis as a typical JAX-RPC
implementation. The detail of this implementation (i.e. class diagram, sequence diagram, and
Java docs) will be provided after translation and review.
</DIV>
<H1 id="section6">6. Appendix: Sample Application</H1>
<DIV>
This sample application uses the WeatherForecastService to enable a cacheable scenario. When
an end-user sets a location (like as Tokyo, Osaka, or Kyoto) and invokes the service, the
system returns chance of rains for the specified area. Additionally, if the request is cached data
and the cache is still valid data, the response message will be picked up from the cache
repository.
</DIV>
<DIV ALIGN="CENTER">
<img src="images/image6.gif"/>
</DIV>
<DIV>
<B>Note:</B> The role of the HTTP Header Handler is to set a HTTP protocol header for cache controls.
</DIV>
<HR id="page9"/>
<TABLE WIDTH="100%">
<TR><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">Copyright © 2003 Toshiyuki Kimura</TD></TR>
<TR><TD ALIGN="LEFT">- Page 9 -</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
<H1 id="section7">7. Appendix: Unresolved issues</H1>
<DIV>
The following items are to be determined.
</DIV>
<TABLE BORDER="1" WIDTH="90%" ALIGN="CENTER">
<TR ALIGN="CENTER">
<TH>ID</TH><TH>Name</TH><TH>Detail (actual state)</TH>
</TR>
<TR>
<TD>1</TD><TD>Dynamic cache-control API</TD><TD>The current version only provides static configurations with
server-config.wsdd.</TD>
</TR>
<TR>
<TD>2</TD><TD>SwA (SOAP Messages with Attachments)</TD><TD>The current version doesn't support caching a response which
has attachment parts.</TD>
</TR>
<TR>
<TD>3</TD><TD>Protocol-bindings independent Caching Mechanism</TD><TD>The current version is a prototype for HTTP bindings. To
create a protocol-bindings independent Caching Mechanism,
the following needs to be done;
<UL>
<LI> Specify a standard SOAP Message header to cache</LI>
<LI> Implement a SOAP Message setter on server side</LI>
<LI> Implement a SOAP Message parser on client side</LI>
</UL></TD>
</TR>
</TABLE>
<HR id="page10"/>
<TABLE WIDTH="100%">
<TR><TD ALIGN="RIGHT">Copyright © 2003 Toshiyuki Kimura</TD></TR>
<TR><TD ALIGN="LEFT">- Page 10 -</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
<TABLE BORDER="0" WIDTH="100%" CELLSPACING="100">
<TR><TD></TD></TR>
<TR><TD>
<BLOCKQUATE>
Sun, Sun Microsystems, and Java are trademarks or registered trademarks of
Sun Microsystems, Inc. All other product names mentioned herein are
trademarks of their respective owners.
</BLOCKQUATE>
</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
</p>
</section>
</body>
</document>
1.1 ws-axis/site/src4forrest-060/java/src/documentation/content/xdocs/docs/F2F-2.xml
Index: F2F-2.xml
===================================================================
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE document PUBLIC "-//APACHE//DTD Documentation V1.2//EN" "./dtd/document-v12.dtd">
<document>
<header>
<title>WebServices - Axis</title>
</header>
<body>
<section>
<title>WebServices - Axis - </title>
<p>
<h2>Notes from Axis Face-to-Face Meeting at Allaire, Newton, MA. </h2>
<h3>Date: 28 Feb 2001</h3>
<b>Attendees:</b>
<ul>
<li>Glen Daniels, Allaire. Host</li>
<li>Doug Davis, IBM Raleigh</li>
<li>Steve Graham, IBM Raleigh</li>
<li>Jim Stearns, HP Redmond</li>
<li>Jacek Kopecky, Idoox, Prague</li>
<li>Waqar Sadiq, Vitria</li>
<li>James Snell, IBM Fresno (by phone)</li>
<li>Stuart Williams, HP Bristol</li>
</ul>
<p>Glen expressed some frustration at the lack of good tools that Apache provides for project management. The mailing list archives kind of bite, etc. SourceForge seems to have good tools for scheduling / task management / collaboration...</p>
<p><i><b>ACTION ITEM : Glen will email Sam and ask about the possibility of "co-locating" the project with SourceForge? Investigating other tools and solutions?</b></i></p>
<p>Waquar Sadiq from Vitria, a new member of the team, volunteered to be Project Manager for Axis! (applause applause)</p>
<p>Steve presented a short Powerpoint presentation to frame the meeting.</p>
Axis 1.0 will be a serious product. As such, it will have:
<ul>
<li>product-level code</li>
<li>product-level testing</li>
<li>product-level doc + examples</li>
<li>product-level performance</li>
</ul>
<h4>Goals for the 1.0 release:</h4>
<ul>
<li>Full SOAP 1.1 implementation</li>
<ul>
<li>Interoperability testing/discussions to answer ambiguities</li>
<li>Intermediary implementation must be in 1.0 release</li>
</ul>
<li>Relative priority (Glen)</li>
<ul>
<li>Full implementation of 1.1</li>
<li>Customer requirements</li>
<li>Where xmlp is headed (Glen, Waqar, Jacek are all on XML Protocol group)</li>
</ul>
<li>Fast (need to do the streaming parsing)</li>
<li>Pluggable</li>
</ul>
<p>Support for requestor/provider/intermediary (one-way, initiated by either side); client notification.
Support for request/response and the other 3 transmission primitives from WSDL</p>
<p>Glen : Don't think we should make the axis-user list until 0.9 or beta 1.0...</p>
<p>Issue : Migrating from Apache SOAP to Axis - should be easy, but how easy?</p>
<p>Waqar: We should be tracking ebXML as well as XMLP...</p>
<h5>Testing/Process-related discussion...</h5>
<ul>
<li>coding standards</li>
<li>test-case centric development</li>
<li>regression test cases</li>
<li>scenario-centric design/architecture</li>
<li>Unit tests are good, but not sufficient</li>
<li>Is JUnit too oriented towards "white box" unit testing? Jim says they're using it as a framework at HP for both unit and functional.</li>
<li>Three types of testing - unit, functional integration, interop</li>
<li>conformance testing; maybe use the userland validator? leverage external efforts? Microsoft "bakeoff"?</li>
<li>interop testing with big players (.NET) is crucial!</li>
<li>Requiring some level of testing implementation from commmitters is key. The question is how to best codify this in a strong but not draconian way</li>
</ul>
The plan for the rest of today:
<ul>
<li>Walk through requirements doc</li>
<li>Generate scenarios</li>
<li>walk through scenarios, updating requirements</li>
</ul>
<h3>Requirements discussion</h3>
<ul>
<li>lose
1.1 and 1.1.1: architecture is settling not overdoing use of handlers</li>
<li>server-initiated
solicit/response (in WSDL spec)</li>
<li>4
options (synch/asynch, client-initiated vs server-initiated)</li>
<ul type="circle">
<li>requestor/provider
</li>
<li>Facets
(Steve):</li>
<ul type="square">
<li>Who
initiates (server or client)</li>
<li>1-way/2-way</li>
<li>asynch/synch</li>
<li>(1-way
synch makes no sense, so 7 options)</li>
<li>2-way
asynch?</li>
</ul>
<li>Glen:
what is underlying protocol doesn't support synchronous (such as smtp)?</li>
<li>Waqar:
what about async request expecting ack, vs. one not expecting one?</li>
<li>Is this (a)synchronous at the <b>API</b> level, or the <b>transport</b> level?</li>
<li>Call
this topic "message exchange patterns"</li>
<li>"Synchronous"
== blocking</li>
<li>everything is initiated
by a client of the axis engine, which can be on requestor,
intermediary, or provider</li>
<li>Q:
in a one-way WSDL message, can you specify a fault? James: yes, but spec doesn't say what
to do with the fault. Stuart:
thinks treatment of fault is above the message layer.</li>
<li>WSDL
1.1 one-way only has input, but doesn't have output or fault (Steve
brought up)</li>
<li>Stuart:
Service in wsdl is more like operation.</li>
</ul>
<li>What
can we dispatch by?</li>
<ul type="circle">
<li>Dispatch
by transport URL</li>
<li>Dispatch
by HTTP SOAPAction</li>
<li>Dispatch
by QName of first body entry</li>
<li>Dispatch,
using custom handler, by any information available)</li>
</ul>
<li>How
many RPC's per message, and where</li>
<ul type="circle">
<li>Axis
will NOT support a RPC invocation specified in a header</li>
<li>Axis
will support only one RPC invocation per body entry.</li>
<li>Suggestion to remove "first" from body child, 6-2 against.</li>
</ul>
<li>XML
Prototocol - Status</li>
<ul type="circle">
<li>Something
will be published in April issues with SOAP 1.1 that need to be fixed</li>
<li>July-ish:
first XML protocol spec soap 1.1 with fixes to some issues</li>
<li>November:
proposed recommendation</li>
<li>December:
1.0 spec recommendation</li>
</ul>
<li>Intermediaries:
Glen: TRLSoap has implemented them to some extent.</li>
<ul type="circle">
<li>Steve:
state of the art is Single-hop fake.</li>
</ul>
<li>SOAP
Encoding Support</li>
<ul type="circle">
<li>We
use for RPC, and yet won't require xsi:type (<b>type info can come from a
reference to a schema outside the message</b>) </li>
</ul>
<li>Performance</li>
<ul type="circle">
<li>Action
Item: need to research alternative benchmarks for SOAP performance (Jim
volunteered) and for interoperability.</li>
<ul type="square">
<li>UI</li>
</ul>
<li>Glen
was willing to prioritize "not significantly slower" as want but not
required. Jim advocated that we
need at release, and Steve agreed.</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<p>Discussion of metrics - some arguments as to whether it's a Handler or an API. Well, logging is an API, maybe metrics are as well...</p>
<p><i><b>ACTION ITEM: Glen will investigate JRun's metrics API and share with the group.</b></i></p>
<p>We need to have some kind of "Required header" parameter either in the WSDD or as an API in the Handler itself if we want "pre-flight" knowledge of required headers (and perhaps a default fault response)...</p>
<p>Big discussion about header handling - jukebox handler, there were worries that it's a security risk. Glen notes that the handlers that are in the jukebox's registry are limited, just like the handlers on a chain, you just don't need to call them all in order...doesn't seem like a risk.</p>
<hr/>
<h2>Day 2</h2>
<h3>1 March 2001</h3>
<b>Attendees:</b>
<ul>
<li>Glen</li>
<li>Steve</li>
<li>Doug</li>
<li>Jacek</li>
<li>Jim</li>
</ul>
Agenda (wish list):
<ul>
<li>Finish revision of requirements</li>
<li>Develop rough use case scenarios</li>
<li>Revisit requirements after use cases</li>
<li>Glen: supplier pattern</li>
<li>Steve: WSDD</li>
<li>All: streaming parser</li>
</ul>
<p>Code on BOTH client and Server looks like this?</p>
<code>
Handler handler = Axis.getHandler(name1);<br/>
MessageContext mc = new MessageContext();<br/>
// set up MC properties, including target!<br/>
handler.invoke(mc);<br/>
</code>
<h3>Requirements review, continued</h3>
<ul>
<li>Service
Description</li>
<ul type="circle">
<li>Interaction
between WSDL and WSDD. Each can
be used to create the other?</li>
<li>Steve:
hard to generate wsdl for document (rather than rpc).</li>
<li>Jacek:
treat the WSDD as the master</li>
<li>Jim:
no, WSDL is the standard, WSDD is just our team's proposal.</li>
<li>Glen:
WSDD may not contain all the info needed to generate a WSDL file</li>
<li>WSDD
can contain either (1) pointer to existing WSDL file or (2) enough data
(possibly, but not certainly) to generate a WSDL from scratch, or (3)
enough data which in combination with existing WSDL, to generate an
updated WSDL.</li>
<li>WSDD
should provide cross-checking (WSDL not consistent with WSDD)</li>
<li>(I
missed some issues here: there's flexibility here that makes this
difficult e.g. what serializer?)</li>
<li>DISCO
on Axis root added.</li>
<li>Client-side</li>
<ul type="square">
<li>Default
will be simple case: generate a proxy</li>
<li>But
WSDL can require a digital signature header want to be able to have
WSDD on client side to deploy a chain that includes a digital signature
generator.</li>
<li>Doug:
where to get digital signature handler?</li>
<ul>
<li>Steve/Glen: wsdl can include pointer to handler.</li>
<li>Glen: there are extension elements in
WSDL.</li>
</ul>
<li>Added
as wish proxy generation from wsdl (and wsdd). Stated: java, possibly c++</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<li>Platform</li>
<ul type="circle">
<li>Surprising
amount of interest in doing C++ implementation (Glen, Steve, Jacek) for
performance, but was listed as wish [P5]. Background: James Snell added this, including using local
services (e.g. COM).</li>
</ul>
<li>Transports
</li>
<ul type="circle">
<li>SMTP
sender and POP3 poller. Assume external mail server
available. This is what
Apache SOAP 2 does.</li>
<li>Glen:
do we want to provide a generic (fast) transport between handlers?</li>
<ul type="square">
<li>Transport
Sender</li>
<li>Glen:
all transport-specific chains end in a router. Oops, maybe not; if no router at end, look at target
service field and if not null, invoke that service; then look <i>again</i> to see if target service is not null. Loop until null.</li>
<li>Order</li>
<ul>
<li>Transport
chain no router</li>
<li>Global
chain no router</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<li><i>(Lots
of discussion on axis engine and dispatching)</i></li>
<li>Jim
asked whether any of these transport cases could be punted these
asymmetric cases of HTTP request asking for SMTP response. Glen, Steve, Jacek all said no, we
need to support all of these.</li>
<li>(Discussion
over how to send asymmetric response to request sent over one-way
protocol: callback, or configure in a Transport Sender and if return
message is non-null, send and then null out return message so it. Callback or null-out message? Steve and Jacek: putting up to
committer vote would be a big morass? Jacek: ok, grumble, fallback.</li>
<li>Doug:
are we going to support multi-cast? Jacek: why not? Jim: why?</li>
<li>Things
that Transport Listener must call and set:</li>
<ul type="square">
<li>Static
handler Axis.getHandler(String tlID);</li>
<li>Request
chain bag ID</li>
<li>Response
chain bag ID</li>
<li>Target
bad ID</li>
<li>Transport
Sender</li>
</ul>
<li>Jacek
prefers many small registries over fewer larger ones. Glen said that smaller hash tables
perform lookups faster.</li>
<ul type="square">
<li>Services (deployed handlers)</li>
<li>Handlers
(available handlers)</li>
<li>(After
much discussion, settled on 2)</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<li>Data
Encoding</li>
<ul type="circle">
<li>Steve:
(de)serialization only makes sense for RPC, not document handling.</li>
<li>Jacek
would love to see general serialization at 1.0 release.</li>
<li>Serialization
may occur anywhere, not in one fixed place in Axis architecture.</li>
</ul>
</ul>
<h2>Streaming Parser Discussion</h2>
<p>For reading in input, we use the PDOM model - <br/>
We have either a SAX event source or a pull parser underneath something that looks like JDOM.<br/>
In the SAX case:<br/>
<ol>
<li>a thread starts processing the SAX event stream, and blocks until told to continue.</li>
<li>When people ask for a particular element (i.e. getNextChild()), the parser thread unblocks, and runs the SAX event stream through, building up the JDOM object model, until it gets to the desired element/attribute/etc. Then it blocks again, and returns control to the getWhatever() API.</li>
</ol>
</p>
Sot the Message API gets: (or maybe JDOM gets the latter three)<br/><br/>
<code>
getAsElement()<br/>
parseAsSAX(SAXHandler)<br/>
getAsXMLStream()<br/>
getAsByteStream()<br/>
</code>
<p>Does getAsByteStream() terminate the option of doing anything else afterwards?</p>
How do we test this? Metrics:
<ol>
<li>Use PDOM, read first few elements, then stream rest to file</li>
<li>Use JDOM, process first few elements, then write to file</li>
<li>Stream bytes from file to file</li>
</ol>
<p>do this for small (1K), medium (50K), and large (10 meg) files</p>
<p>On the output side, we should be able to setAsStream, and hand the element a stream which will eventually be pulled for content when someone does a getAsStream() on the whole doc. This means a proxy stream which clunks its way down the message, draining streams it encounters along the way.</p>
<p>Open question - is it easy/efficient to get a JDOM Element as a stream/string, as opposed to a whole doc? Looks like Element.getSerializedForm() isn't implemented yet?</p>
<p>Pull parser discussion - if possible, a real pull parser would avoid the multi-threading, and probably perform better than the SAX-based PDOM model. We'll look into this!</p>
<hr/>
<p>Project Participants:</p>
<ul>
<li>PM: Waqar
(Vitria)</li>
<li>Coders:
Doug, Steve, Glen, Jacek, Jim, James, Yuichi, Ryoh</li>
<ul type="circle">
<li>Glen
and Doug can work on this a lot</li>
<li>James
doing stuff</li>
<li>Steve
doesn't have much time for coding</li>
</ul>
<li>Others:
George, Chris Nelson, Kevin Mitchell, Sanjiva, Matt, </li>
<li>Sam
for political and process stuff.</li>
<li>Connection
to XML Protocol: Glen, Waqar, Jacek</li>
<ul type="circle">
<li>Stuart
for Conversations</li>
</ul>
<li>Connection
to Apache 2.x: Doug, Glen, Sanjiva</li>
<li>(Glen:
SOAP 2.1 documentation is bad, could impact us less credibility).</li>
</ul>
</p>
</section>
</body>
</document>
1.1 ws-axis/site/src4forrest-060/java/src/documentation/content/xdocs/docs/ms-interop.xml
Index: ms-interop.xml
===================================================================
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE document PUBLIC "-//APACHE//DTD Documentation V1.2//EN" "./dtd/document-v12.dtd">
<document>
<header>
<title>WebServices - Axis</title>
</header>
<body>
<section>
<title>WebServices - Axis - Summary of Apache/Microsoft Interoperability Meeting</title>
<p>
Summary of Apache/Microsoft Interoperability Meeting<br/>
March 12-14, 2001
</p>
<p>
From Apache: Glen Daniels, Jim Stearns, Doug Davis<br/>
From MS: (main contacts) Keith Ballinger, Andrew Layman, Eric Andrae
</p>
<p>
Most of the 3 days were spent testing Apache SOAP v2.1 and Axis against
the 5 different versions of SOAP MS has (one being an IE client).
Since Axis doesn't have serialization support yet (just Strings) it
was limited in what it could do, but for those simple tests that
did NOOPs or tested Strings it did ok as a client and a server (just
a few minor tweaks were needed).
</p>
<p>
Apache SOAP v2.1 did much better. There were a few bugs (and holes)
that were discovered but Glen was able to track them down and, I think,
fix all of them. He's in the process of trying to see if the
fixes can be integrated back into the cvs tree, but is unsure about
one of the fix's impact on the MIME support - but we'll see.
</p>
<p>
MS has 5 different versions of SOAP and they've been doing some of
their own interoperability testing internally so I think they were
able to flush out most(all) of their differences before we got there.
However, we did manage to find a bug (or two?) in their code 8-)
but overall they had things pretty well covered.
</p>
<p>
For better or worse, MS is very WSDL dependent. If the industry is
headed down the path of basically requiring WSDL then Apache might
need to do so as well.
</p>
<p>
We had two strategy meetings in which we discussed how to improve
interoperability testing/conformance in the future, not just between
Apache and MS but everyone. We decided to set-up a consortium in
which different SOAP implementations can join and test their version
of SOAP against the others in the group. The main purpose of the
group would be to focus attention on interoperability issues and not
necessarily prove conformance to the SOAP spec. While we will have
testcases that we "believe" test some aspects of conformance we can
not be the defining authority on who is, or is not, spec compliant.
All we can do is pretty much help people say that their SOAP code
can, or can not, play nicely with others in the group. That being
said, there are some definite MUSTs and MUST NOTs in the spec and
we will have some tests that test those so we'll be walking a fine
line.
</p>
<p>
We will also group tests based on sections of the SOAP spec. Not
everyone will want to implement all sections of the spec but will
still want to test conformance based on what they have implemented.
</p>
<p>
To help this "consortium" we're going to set-up a web site
(Jim has already reserved wsinterop.org and soapinterop.org) where
people can post their testcases and test results. We also talked about
having pointers to "live" servers that people can hit to test their
SOAP implementations. It wasn't decided how Apache will work this.
<br/><b>****TODO*****</b><br/>
We need to get someone to volunteer to set this up/host it.
</p>
<p>
Along the lines of getting interoperability, we discussed showcasing
how nicely we're all playing together. 8-) In particular we
discussed having a live demo at a conference (maybe NetWorld Interop
in May) where people can hook up their machines in our network of
computers and join in "the game". "The game" will consist of a fairly
simple maze type of game - each server will own a certain number of
rooms and clients will be able to walk from room to room examining,
and placing, objects in each one. We'll define a set of base SOAP
interfaces that people will need to implement and if they do then
they should be able hook-in their server and extend the maze.
</p>
<p>
Glen is working on the write-up of the overall idea and will
distribute it once it's done. In order to help things along we
agreed to try to have another F2F around the end of April where we
will all get together in a room to hash-out the details of the
game/interfaces and to actually code it up. I (Dug) have agreed to
see if IBM will host it in Raleigh. Glen is going to see if
Allaire (aka Macromedia) will be willing to work on the GUI that
the main-server will use to display the status of the game.
</p>
</section>
</body>
</document>
1.1 ws-axis/site/src4forrest-060/java/src/documentation/content/xdocs/docs/SOAPVerse.xml
Index: SOAPVerse.xml
===================================================================
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE document PUBLIC "-//APACHE//DTD Documentation V1.2//EN" "./dtd/document-v12.dtd">
<document>
<header>
<title>WebServices - Axis</title>
</header>
<body>
<section>
<title>WebServices - Axis - SOAPVerse</title>
<p>
Hi folks!
</p>
<p>
This is a quick writeup of an idea that a bunch of folks had last week while
discussing interoperability demos and tests. It's a pretty simple system
which we thought was a) fun, b) technically interesting, and c) quite a
compelling demo. I'd like to know what people think of the idea - is this
too ambitious, is it something you'd be psyched to help design/implement,
is it cool?
</p>
<p>
The SOAPVerse : A long-term SOAP interoperability demo<br/>
------------------------------------------------------<br/>
</p>
<p>
[1.0 Introduction - the view from outside]
</p>
<p>
I'll start explaining the idea by giving a brief scenario. You connect a
browser to SOAPVerse.org, which gives you three choices - 1) enter the
SOAPVerse, 2) look at the map, and 3) learn about joining. You choose #1,
and are offered a list of available clients and "entry portals" (i.e.
clients (no, not "IE clients", necessarily...)) on the web. You choose a
local entry portal, and a Java applet appears, primarily composed of a text
window:
</p>
<p>
--------------<br/>
SOAP Tower<br/>
</p>
<p>
You stand in the SOAP tower. The floor's a bit slippery here, but you
suspect you could make it to the exits to the NORTH or EAST if you walked
slowly.
</p>
<p>
There is a briefcase sitting here.
</p>
<p>
(this room lives at foo.ibm.com, and is powered by Tomcat/Apache-SOAP 2.1!)
--------------<br/>
</p>
<p>
It's a text adventure, much like Zork or Colossal Cave, but a lot simpler.
The interesting part happens when you move to the East:
</p>
<p>
--------------<br/>
[a strange feeling overcomes you for a moment as you pass through the door]
</p>
<p>
Campus West
</p>
<p>
You stand on the Microsoft campus, near building 33. You may ENTER, or
travel WEST or SOUTH down the main road.
</p>
<p>
Others in this room : KeithB
</p>
<p>
There is a rubber ducky sitting here.
</p>
<p>
(this room lives at bar.microsoft.com, and is powered by IIS/ASP.NET!)<br/>
---------------<br/>
</p>
<p>
What just happened is that you smoothly and transparently moved from one
SOAP-based server to another. The servers had to interoperate to "pass you
off", and anyone who wants to go check out the website can see the deeper
technical explanation of what's going on.
</p>
<p>
If you'd selected the "map" option, you'd see a cool graphical depiction of
the whole graph of rooms currently connected to the SOAPVerse, color-coded
by host/server technology.
</p>
<p>
[2.0 Digging a little deeper]
</p>
<p>
That's the basic idea - a totally distributed text adventure game that
demonstrates SOAP interoperability at a number of levels. The actual APIs
are pretty simple, and should be implementable in few days at the most.
</p>
<p>
So if you go to the "join us" section of the site, you end up with several
things. First, a description of the structure of the application, in
enough
detail that you could implement it on your own site. This can (and should)
be in as many forms as possible - english text, WSDL, SDL, IDL, etc....
So you build the server to the spec, in any language/environment/platform
you happen to have handy.
</p>
<p>
Next, you find a form which allows you to test your server once you've got
it up. This causes the SOAPVerse server to run a series of tests against
your endpoint, to see if you can interoperate with it. Assuming that
works,
you can click "hook me up!" and the SOAPVerse server randomly picks a place
on the graph to add your area, and matchmakes a connection between your
server and whoever you're connecting to. The tests should get run again
between you and this new guy, to make sure you two interoperate (you don't
want to just prove interoperation between the "main" server and your impl),
and then if everything looks good, you're now a part of the world, and your
rooms appear on the master map.
</p>
<p>
There's some more detail about which kinds of things we're testing with a
system like this (data serialization, headers, intermediaries?), actual
APIs,
etc. but I'll convey my thoughts about that in a design discussion if
there's
enough community interest in this project.
</p>
<p>
[3.0 Musings]
</p>
<p>
This kind of thing serves at least two purposes. First, it can stay up in
perpetuity, demonstrating SOAP interoperability in a fun way. This should
be something you can always find, and hook new servers into. Second, it's
a
good demo for tradeshow-type events.
</p>
<p>
Obviously there's a lot of opportunity for errors to happen here, so the
system shouldn't assume too much about robustness, and should gracefully
fail in the face of problems. It's meant as an interoperability demo,
not a full-scale game.
</p>
<p>
None of this is at all carved in stone, we just liked the basic idea. It
shouldn't get too complicated, and it shouldn't rely on any particular
implementation.
</p>
<p>
If this could get done by late next month, this could be the actual
technolgy
for the "interopathon" demo which has been discussed for NetWorld/Interop
in May.
</p>
<p>
What do you think?
</p>
<p>
--Glen
</p>
</section>
</body>
</document>