[
https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/SMXCOMP-660?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=55022#action_55022
]
Christian Connert edited comment on SMXCOMP-660 at 10/27/09 8:38 AM:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Freeman,
I wasn't serious, I know that a patch shouldn't break the existing
infrastructure. Thus I'll investigate further.
Never then less, even if the patch currently isn't and may won't be accepted
what will you do about those bugs?
I think this are some essential problems (special breaking the JBI standard and
the header propagation).
I'll work on with this version and see where it gets me.
So long
Christian
was (Author: mellowsnow):
Hi Freeman,
I wasn't serious, I know that a patch shouldn't break the existing
infrastructure. Thus I'll investigate further.
Never then less, even if the patch currently isn't and may won't be accepted
what will you do about those bugs?
I think this are some essential problems (special breaking the JBI standard and
the header propagation).
I'll work on with this version and see where it gets me.
So long
Christian
p.s.: could it be that some thest are broken (e.g. I've no
/wsdl/calculator.wsdl file)?
> CXF-BC Component isn't JBI conform
> ----------------------------------
>
> Key: SMXCOMP-660
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/SMXCOMP-660
> Project: ServiceMix Components
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: servicemix-cxf-bc
> Affects Versions: servicemix-cxf-bc-2009.01
> Environment: System:
> 2.6.28-15-generic #52-Ubuntu SMP Wed Sep 9 10:48:52 UTC 2009 x86_64 GNU/Linux
> JAVA:
> java version "1.6.0_16"
> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 1.6.0_16-b01)
> Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 14.2-b01, mixed mode)
> Server:
> apache-tomcat-6.0.14
> ServiceMix:
> 3.3.1 war
> Reporter: Christian Connert
> Assignee: Freeman Fang
> Priority: Critical
> Attachments: cxfbc.patch
>
>
> Hi,
> I just noticed that the CXF-BC Component ain't standard conform. There are
> several problems:
> 1.) The JbiInInterceptor is supposed to write the (soap) headers to the
> NormalizedMessage (javax.jbi.messaging.protocol.headers). Accordingly to the
> JBI Spec. the headers should be stored within a
> Map<String,org.w3c.dom.DocumentFragment>. But in fact the JbiInInterceptor
> just puts the header.getObject() in the map. Which results in a
> ClassCastException in other components (like JMS). The objects are some DOM
> ElementImpl.
> 2.) I'm very unhappy with the fix
> (https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/SMXCOMP-203 states) which removes
> the WS-Security header from the propagated headers. It's not necessary that
> the security is implemented with cxf. Thus I think that this fix is not
> correct. It would be better to e.g. use some other saaj implementation (for
> instance axis2). Further it might help to at some xerces jar into the class
> path, but I haven't tested it yet.
> 3.) If useJBIWrapper==true the JbiInWsdl1Interceptor warps the message within
> JBI parts. That is correct. If headers are specified in the WSDL then these
> headers are added as separate parts. But it never removes the headers, which
> where added as part, from the SoapMessage, thus the JbiInInterceptor will put
> them into the javax.jbi.messaging.protocol.headers map. I think this is not
> like it should be. Servicemix soap does remove the headers form the
> underlying message and only puts unspecified (not part of the WSDL) headers
> into the javax.jbi.messaging.protocol.headers map.
> kind regards
> Christian
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
