You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tuscany.apache.org by Greg Dritschler <gr...@gmail.com> on 2012/02/15 17:58:48 UTC
Question about wsdl.service and SOAP intent
When a web service binding uses wsdl.service, WebServiceBindingProcessor
picks the first port.
if (model.getPortName() != null) {
port =
service.getElement().getPort(model.getPortName());
} else {
// BWS20006 - no port specified so pick the first
one
port =
(Port)service.getElement().getPorts().values().iterator().next();
}
What if the reference requires SOAP.v1_1 or SOAP.v1_2? Shouldn't it pick a
port that uses a matching SOAP binding? The web services binding
specification says:
139 If the binding is for an SCA reference, the set of available ports
for the reference consists of the
140 ports in the WSDL service that have portTypes which are compatible
supersets of the SCA
141 reference as defined in the SCA Assembly Model specification
[SCA-Assembly] and satisfy all
142 the policy constraints of the binding.
Re: Question about wsdl.service and SOAP intent
Posted by Greg Dritschler <gr...@gmail.com>.
I was thinking about having the WebServiceBindingBuilder perform the port
selection. It calls the WebServiceBinding methods getBinding(),
setBinding(), and setGeneratedWSDLDocument() which
drive determineWSDLCharacteristics() under the covers. It seems like this
should be done consistently with the final port selection.
Off the top of my head, I can't see why CompositePolicyBuilder would depend
on WSDLServiceGenerator running first. Maybe I should try reversing them.
On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 9:01 AM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 4:00 AM, Greg Dritschler
> <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > For something that seems so simple, this is turning into a quagmire.
> >
> > The web service binding processor is not the best place to test intents
> > because the builder obviously has not yet run and propagated intents
> down to
> > the binding. It would only be able to test the intent on the binding
> > itself.
> >
> > The other option is to do the selection in the reference binding
> provider,
> > and actually it does happen that way now. By the point where the
> provider
> > gets control, the binding's port is null. Axis2ReferenceBindingProvider
> has
> > code to select the port. Unlike the web service binding provider, it
> > doesn't just pick the first. It gives preference to the first port with
> a
> > SOAP 1.1 address element, and it can't find one it takes the first SOAP
> 1.2
> > port.
> >
> > How is the binding's port null in the provider if the processor
> previously
> > selected the first port? Well, WSDLServiceGenerator tests if the user
> WSDL
> > provided a port by calling binding.getPortName(). Since the binding
> model
> > is still marked unresolved, it returns null (this is wsdl.service so
> there
> > is no port name). This causes WSDLServiceGenerator to import all the
> > bindings and set the binding's port to null.
> >
> > Why is the binding model still unresolved? Well, the processor's resolve
> > operation never marks it resolved.
> >
> > So, if the provider already has to select the port, why not have it use
> the
> > SOAP intent to drive a selection? Well, when the binding processor
> selected
> > the first port, it set the binding uri to that port's address. Then when
> > WSDLServiceGenerator copies the ports over to the wrapper WSDL, it stores
> > the binding uri into the port address. So the address to use is
> clobbered.
> >
> > Ok, let's change the binding processor to not select a port for
> wsdl.service
> > since the provider's going to choose it anyway. Well, when I tried
> this, I
> > got a NoSuchElementException
> in WebServiceBindingImpl.setIsDocumentStyle().
> > The binding is null, so it looks for the first WSDL Message in the
> > Definition to determine the document style. In my case the main WSDL
> > document has no Messages of its own but imports them from another file.
> I
> > suppose this is a problem that could be hit in other ways and I just got
> > unlucky.
> >
> > I guess I can continue to poke away at this, but I'm beginning to wonder
> if
> > this functionality is worth the effort.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Greg Dritschler
> >> <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > When a web service binding uses wsdl.service,
> WebServiceBindingProcessor
> >> > picks the first port.
> >> >
> >> > if (model.getPortName() != null) {
> >> > port =
> >> > service.getElement().getPort(model.getPortName());
> >> > } else {
> >> > // BWS20006 - no port specified so pick the
> >> > first
> >> > one
> >> > port =
> >> > (Port)service.getElement().getPorts().values().iterator().next();
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > What if the reference requires SOAP.v1_1 or SOAP.v1_2? Shouldn't it
> >> > pick a
> >> > port that uses a matching SOAP binding? The web services binding
> >> > specification says:
> >> >
> >> > 139 If the binding is for an SCA reference, the set of available
> ports
> >> > for
> >> > the reference consists of the
> >> > 140 ports in the WSDL service that have portTypes which are
> compatible
> >> > supersets of the SCA
> >> > 141 reference as defined in the SCA Assembly Model specification
> >> > [SCA-Assembly] and satisfy all
> >> > 142 the policy constraints of the binding.
> >>
> >> Greg
> >>
> >> Sounds right to me.
> >>
> >> Simon
> >>
> >> --
> >> Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org
> >> Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
> >
> >
>
> It sounds like that to get the WSDL gen to work properly the port has
> to be selected before the provider runs. But it looks like this test
> can't even be moved to the WebServiceBindingBuilder as that runs
> before the CompositePolicyBuilder. Tricky.
>
> The fix that first comes to mind based on what you've described is to
> try and correct the WSDL gen piece so that it doesn't mess up the URL
> so that there is a chance of performing the proper selection in the
> provider.
>
> Simon
>
> --
> Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org
> Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
>
Re: Question about wsdl.service and SOAP intent
Posted by Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>.
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 4:00 AM, Greg Dritschler
<gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> For something that seems so simple, this is turning into a quagmire.
>
> The web service binding processor is not the best place to test intents
> because the builder obviously has not yet run and propagated intents down to
> the binding. It would only be able to test the intent on the binding
> itself.
>
> The other option is to do the selection in the reference binding provider,
> and actually it does happen that way now. By the point where the provider
> gets control, the binding's port is null. Axis2ReferenceBindingProvider has
> code to select the port. Unlike the web service binding provider, it
> doesn't just pick the first. It gives preference to the first port with a
> SOAP 1.1 address element, and it can't find one it takes the first SOAP 1.2
> port.
>
> How is the binding's port null in the provider if the processor previously
> selected the first port? Well, WSDLServiceGenerator tests if the user WSDL
> provided a port by calling binding.getPortName(). Since the binding model
> is still marked unresolved, it returns null (this is wsdl.service so there
> is no port name). This causes WSDLServiceGenerator to import all the
> bindings and set the binding's port to null.
>
> Why is the binding model still unresolved? Well, the processor's resolve
> operation never marks it resolved.
>
> So, if the provider already has to select the port, why not have it use the
> SOAP intent to drive a selection? Well, when the binding processor selected
> the first port, it set the binding uri to that port's address. Then when
> WSDLServiceGenerator copies the ports over to the wrapper WSDL, it stores
> the binding uri into the port address. So the address to use is clobbered.
>
> Ok, let's change the binding processor to not select a port for wsdl.service
> since the provider's going to choose it anyway. Well, when I tried this, I
> got a NoSuchElementException in WebServiceBindingImpl.setIsDocumentStyle().
> The binding is null, so it looks for the first WSDL Message in the
> Definition to determine the document style. In my case the main WSDL
> document has no Messages of its own but imports them from another file. I
> suppose this is a problem that could be hit in other ways and I just got
> unlucky.
>
> I guess I can continue to poke away at this, but I'm beginning to wonder if
> this functionality is worth the effort.
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Greg Dritschler
>> <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > When a web service binding uses wsdl.service, WebServiceBindingProcessor
>> > picks the first port.
>> >
>> > if (model.getPortName() != null) {
>> > port =
>> > service.getElement().getPort(model.getPortName());
>> > } else {
>> > // BWS20006 - no port specified so pick the
>> > first
>> > one
>> > port =
>> > (Port)service.getElement().getPorts().values().iterator().next();
>> > }
>> >
>> > What if the reference requires SOAP.v1_1 or SOAP.v1_2? Shouldn't it
>> > pick a
>> > port that uses a matching SOAP binding? The web services binding
>> > specification says:
>> >
>> > 139 If the binding is for an SCA reference, the set of available ports
>> > for
>> > the reference consists of the
>> > 140 ports in the WSDL service that have portTypes which are compatible
>> > supersets of the SCA
>> > 141 reference as defined in the SCA Assembly Model specification
>> > [SCA-Assembly] and satisfy all
>> > 142 the policy constraints of the binding.
>>
>> Greg
>>
>> Sounds right to me.
>>
>> Simon
>>
>> --
>> Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org
>> Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
>
>
It sounds like that to get the WSDL gen to work properly the port has
to be selected before the provider runs. But it looks like this test
can't even be moved to the WebServiceBindingBuilder as that runs
before the CompositePolicyBuilder. Tricky.
The fix that first comes to mind based on what you've described is to
try and correct the WSDL gen piece so that it doesn't mess up the URL
so that there is a chance of performing the proper selection in the
provider.
Simon
--
Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org
Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
Re: Question about wsdl.service and SOAP intent
Posted by Greg Dritschler <gr...@gmail.com>.
For something that seems so simple, this is turning into a quagmire.
The web service binding processor is not the best place to test intents
because the builder obviously has not yet run and propagated intents down
to the binding. It would only be able to test the intent on the binding
itself.
The other option is to do the selection in the reference binding provider,
and actually it does happen that way now. By the point where the provider
gets control, the binding's port is null. Axis2ReferenceBindingProvider
has code to select the port. Unlike the web service binding provider, it
doesn't just pick the first. It gives preference to the first port with a
SOAP 1.1 address element, and it can't find one it takes the first SOAP 1.2
port.
How is the binding's port null in the provider if the processor previously
selected the first port? Well, WSDLServiceGenerator tests if the user WSDL
provided a port by calling binding.getPortName(). Since the binding model
is still marked unresolved, it returns null (this is wsdl.service so there
is no port name). This causes WSDLServiceGenerator to import all the
bindings and set the binding's port to null.
Why is the binding model still unresolved? Well, the processor's resolve
operation never marks it resolved.
So, if the provider already has to select the port, why not have it use the
SOAP intent to drive a selection? Well, when the binding processor
selected the first port, it set the binding uri to that port's address.
Then when WSDLServiceGenerator copies the ports over to the wrapper WSDL,
it stores the binding uri into the port address. So the address to use is
clobbered.
Ok, let's change the binding processor to not select a port for
wsdl.service since the provider's going to choose it anyway. Well, when I
tried this, I got a NoSuchElementException
in WebServiceBindingImpl.setIsDocumentStyle(). The binding is null, so it
looks for the first WSDL Message in the Definition to determine the
document style. In my case the main WSDL document has no Messages of its
own but imports them from another file. I suppose this is a problem that
could be hit in other ways and I just got unlucky.
I guess I can continue to poke away at this, but I'm beginning to wonder if
this functionality is worth the effort.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 12:53 PM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Greg Dritschler
> <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > When a web service binding uses wsdl.service, WebServiceBindingProcessor
> > picks the first port.
> >
> > if (model.getPortName() != null) {
> > port =
> > service.getElement().getPort(model.getPortName());
> > } else {
> > // BWS20006 - no port specified so pick the first
> > one
> > port =
> > (Port)service.getElement().getPorts().values().iterator().next();
> > }
> >
> > What if the reference requires SOAP.v1_1 or SOAP.v1_2? Shouldn't it
> pick a
> > port that uses a matching SOAP binding? The web services binding
> > specification says:
> >
> > 139 If the binding is for an SCA reference, the set of available ports
> for
> > the reference consists of the
> > 140 ports in the WSDL service that have portTypes which are compatible
> > supersets of the SCA
> > 141 reference as defined in the SCA Assembly Model specification
> > [SCA-Assembly] and satisfy all
> > 142 the policy constraints of the binding.
>
> Greg
>
> Sounds right to me.
>
> Simon
>
> --
> Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org
> Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
>
Re: Question about wsdl.service and SOAP intent
Posted by Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>.
On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Greg Dritschler
<gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> When a web service binding uses wsdl.service, WebServiceBindingProcessor
> picks the first port.
>
> if (model.getPortName() != null) {
> port =
> service.getElement().getPort(model.getPortName());
> } else {
> // BWS20006 - no port specified so pick the first
> one
> port =
> (Port)service.getElement().getPorts().values().iterator().next();
> }
>
> What if the reference requires SOAP.v1_1 or SOAP.v1_2? Shouldn't it pick a
> port that uses a matching SOAP binding? The web services binding
> specification says:
>
> 139 If the binding is for an SCA reference, the set of available ports for
> the reference consists of the
> 140 ports in the WSDL service that have portTypes which are compatible
> supersets of the SCA
> 141 reference as defined in the SCA Assembly Model specification
> [SCA-Assembly] and satisfy all
> 142 the policy constraints of the binding.
Greg
Sounds right to me.
Simon
--
Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org
Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com