Hi, +1 for SenderFault & ReceiverFault.. This gives us more control of the Faults in the MessageReceivers level...
>> * Then in the AxisServlet (line 385) when using SOAP12 we are setting >> the response http status code to BAD_REQUEST(400) if the FaultCode is >> sender which was the result of the SOAPFault with http-400... > > According to RFC2616 HTTP 400 is the correct HTTP status code if the > fault is with the client. Also according to SOAP 1.2 HTTP binding[2] > status code should be 400 when the fault code is Sender
I completely agree with this... I stated this just to clarify the path.. :)
> I think this can be a bug in Axis2 code as status code 400 doesn't mean > it should not process this. +1, we should definitely be looking for SOAP faults unless there's a known code like 404. But we need to make sure we handle HTML responses from servers too if at all possible.
+1 for trying to process those... But we might need to be careful about the situations where there will be just a HTTP-Error code... BTW what's our policy when mapping the transport level errors to the SOAPFaults.. I mean what we put in to code, reason, details, etc.... We are trying to come up with a generic javascript error object[1] for the WSRequest specification. Just curious about how Axis2 handles it as one of our WSRequest implementations is done on top of Axis2... Thanks, Thilina [1] http://www.wso2.org/wiki/display/mashup/Ideas+for+evolving+WSRequest
Thanks, --Glen --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Thilina Gunarathne - http://www.wso2.com - http://thilinag.blogspot.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
