You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@servicemix.apache.org by Janne Savukoski <ja...@savukoski.name> on 2007/03/29 15:35:02 UTC
SOAP binding/serialization
Hi,
I had some issues with soap messages not being serialized properly,
header/body handling (binding) etc. I'm using the wsdl11-wrapping and
I don't know if it has something to do with this. Anyways, at least it
looks like the binding stuff is being discarded at
org.apache.servicemix.http.HttpEndpoint:228, but I don't know if the
part handling (soap binding) was occurring before that; although, the
end-results weren't suggesting so. (All parts were serialized to the
soap body, or something.) So I hacked up this little patch which does
the part handling. Diffs attached. Best effort -kind of stuff, works
for me. Just if anyone else is interested.. Though, I didn't quite get
what HttpEndpoint#overrideDefinition was trying to do so that hack may
be a little conflicting.. (see the httpendpoint-patch.)
I'd also like to know if this would somehow work without the patch as
patches are a bit annoying. :)
(There also appears to be some major stuff coming in the soap2-module,
but it seemed a little incomplete so I didn't take a closer look.)
Btw., I guess the soap-headers of the reply message are being
forwarded correctly?
-janne
Re: SOAP binding/serialization
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
Sorry to answer with such a delay.
The wsdl11 wrapper is not supported yet, this is one of the purpose of
the new soap2 module. The consumer part is in a usable state
and I have something ready to commit on the provider side, but I'm waiting
for some recent jetty snapshots to be published (I guess I will upload
some to our private repo soon).
So I'm not really at ease with changing the current endpoints to add
a non complete support for the wsdl 1.1 wrapper ...
If you want to test it, I can commit the work I did on the provider endpoint
...
On 3/29/07, Janne Savukoski <ja...@savukoski.name> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I had some issues with soap messages not being serialized properly,
> header/body handling (binding) etc. I'm using the wsdl11-wrapping and
> I don't know if it has something to do with this. Anyways, at least it
> looks like the binding stuff is being discarded at
> org.apache.servicemix.http.HttpEndpoint:228, but I don't know if the
> part handling (soap binding) was occurring before that; although, the
> end-results weren't suggesting so. (All parts were serialized to the
> soap body, or something.) So I hacked up this little patch which does
> the part handling. Diffs attached. Best effort -kind of stuff, works
> for me. Just if anyone else is interested.. Though, I didn't quite get
> what HttpEndpoint#overrideDefinition was trying to do so that hack may
> be a little conflicting.. (see the httpendpoint-patch.)
>
> I'd also like to know if this would somehow work without the patch as
> patches are a bit annoying. :)
>
> (There also appears to be some major stuff coming in the soap2-module,
> but it seemed a little incomplete so I didn't take a closer look.)
>
> Btw., I guess the soap-headers of the reply message are being
> forwarded correctly?
>
>
> -janne
>
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Architect, LogicBlaze (http://www.logicblaze.com/)
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
Re: SOAP binding/serialization
Posted by Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>.
On 4/4/07, Janne Savukoski <ja...@savukoski.name> wrote:
>
> Np with the delay, I'm surviving fine with my patches. :) I thought
> the case might be something like this and the soap2 looked really
> promising. No need to hurry, at least just for me. As my patches work
> for now, I can wait for an actual release. And I /urge/ you not to
> waste any time on expanding the soon-to-be-legacy soap-component.
Cool
Btw., what's the status with xfire?
XFire is now in maintenance mode with regular bug fixes release.
In ServiceMix, XFire is mainly used in the jsr181 component.
> From: "Guillaume Nodet" <gn...@gmail.com>
> > Sorry to answer with such a delay.
> > The wsdl11 wrapper is not supported yet, this is one of the purpose of
> > the new soap2 module. The consumer part is in a usable state
> > and I have something ready to commit on the provider side, but I'm
> waiting
> > for some recent jetty snapshots to be published (I guess I will upload
> > some to our private repo soon).
> > So I'm not really at ease with changing the current endpoints to add
> > a non complete support for the wsdl 1.1 wrapper ...
> > If you want to test it, I can commit the work I did on the provider
> endpoint
> > ...
> >
> > On 3/29/07, Janne Savukoski <ja...@savukoski.name> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I had some issues with soap messages not being serialized properly,
> > > header/body handling (binding) etc. I'm using the wsdl11-wrapping and
> > > I don't know if it has something to do with this. Anyways, at least it
> > > looks like the binding stuff is being discarded at
> > > org.apache.servicemix.http.HttpEndpoint:228, but I don't know if the
> > > part handling (soap binding) was occurring before that; although, the
> > > end-results weren't suggesting so. (All parts were serialized to the
> > > soap body, or something.) So I hacked up this little patch which does
> > > the part handling. Diffs attached. Best effort -kind of stuff, works
> > > for me. Just if anyone else is interested.. Though, I didn't quite get
> > > what HttpEndpoint#overrideDefinition was trying to do so that hack may
> > > be a little conflicting.. (see the httpendpoint-patch.)
> > >
> > > I'd also like to know if this would somehow work without the patch as
> > > patches are a bit annoying. :)
> > >
> > > (There also appears to be some major stuff coming in the soap2-module,
> > > but it seemed a little incomplete so I didn't take a closer look.)
> > >
> > > Btw., I guess the soap-headers of the reply message are being
> > > forwarded correctly?
>
--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Architect, LogicBlaze (http://www.logicblaze.com/)
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
Re: SOAP binding/serialization
Posted by Janne Savukoski <ja...@savukoski.name>.
Np with the delay, I'm surviving fine with my patches. :) I thought
the case might be something like this and the soap2 looked really
promising. No need to hurry, at least just for me. As my patches work
for now, I can wait for an actual release. And I /urge/ you not to
waste any time on expanding the soon-to-be-legacy soap-component.
Btw., what's the status with xfire?
> From: "Guillaume Nodet" <gn...@gmail.com>
> Sorry to answer with such a delay.
> The wsdl11 wrapper is not supported yet, this is one of the purpose of
> the new soap2 module. The consumer part is in a usable state
> and I have something ready to commit on the provider side, but I'm waiting
> for some recent jetty snapshots to be published (I guess I will upload
> some to our private repo soon).
> So I'm not really at ease with changing the current endpoints to add
> a non complete support for the wsdl 1.1 wrapper ...
> If you want to test it, I can commit the work I did on the provider endpoint
> ...
>
> On 3/29/07, Janne Savukoski <ja...@savukoski.name> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I had some issues with soap messages not being serialized properly,
> > header/body handling (binding) etc. I'm using the wsdl11-wrapping and
> > I don't know if it has something to do with this. Anyways, at least it
> > looks like the binding stuff is being discarded at
> > org.apache.servicemix.http.HttpEndpoint:228, but I don't know if the
> > part handling (soap binding) was occurring before that; although, the
> > end-results weren't suggesting so. (All parts were serialized to the
> > soap body, or something.) So I hacked up this little patch which does
> > the part handling. Diffs attached. Best effort -kind of stuff, works
> > for me. Just if anyone else is interested.. Though, I didn't quite get
> > what HttpEndpoint#overrideDefinition was trying to do so that hack may
> > be a little conflicting.. (see the httpendpoint-patch.)
> >
> > I'd also like to know if this would somehow work without the patch as
> > patches are a bit annoying. :)
> >
> > (There also appears to be some major stuff coming in the soap2-module,
> > but it seemed a little incomplete so I didn't take a closer look.)
> >
> > Btw., I guess the soap-headers of the reply message are being
> > forwarded correctly?