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 Zé Ricardo <ze...@gmail.com> on 2008/12/15 21:55:01 UTC

[axis2] Why isn't WS-Addressing "Destination Unreachable" fault generated?

Hi devs,

Is there any reason for the WS-Addressing "Destination Unreachable"
fault not be generated?
I know that the SOAP-Binding specification specifies it as optional. I
just wanted to know if there's a practical reason. :)

Best Regards,

José Ricardo.

Re: [axis2] Why isn't WS-Addressing "Destination Unreachable" fault generated?

Posted by Zé Ricardo <ze...@gmail.com>.
When I invoke a offline service using OperationClient's execute
method, I get an "empty" AxisFault. By empty I mean that AxisFault's
getFaultCode(), getFaultSubCodes(), getFaultCodeElement(),
getFaultReasonElement(), etc., all return null.

Am I doing something wrong?

José Ricardo.


On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 6:10 PM, David Illsley <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Because there aren't any situations we've come across where it's
> better than 404ing... I'd be interested if you come across any.
> David
>
> On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Zé Ricardo <ze...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi devs,
>>
>> Is there any reason for the WS-Addressing "Destination Unreachable"
>> fault not be generated?
>> I know that the SOAP-Binding specification specifies it as optional. I
>> just wanted to know if there's a practical reason. :)
>>
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> José Ricardo.
>>
>

Re: [axis2] Why isn't WS-Addressing "Destination Unreachable" fault generated?

Posted by David Illsley <da...@gmail.com>.
Because there aren't any situations we've come across where it's
better than 404ing... I'd be interested if you come across any.
David

On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 8:55 PM, Zé Ricardo <ze...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi devs,
>
> Is there any reason for the WS-Addressing "Destination Unreachable"
> fault not be generated?
> I know that the SOAP-Binding specification specifies it as optional. I
> just wanted to know if there's a practical reason. :)
>
> Best Regards,
>
> José Ricardo.
>