Hi Werner, I'm now using the JAX-RPC compliant handler.
First we tried the WSDoAll* classes. As we need to configure WS-Sec on a per call basis, we configured handler using the call.setClientHandlers(reqHandler, respHandler) method. With the effect, that during serialization namespaces got lost. A code review indicates that doing so is activating a completely different WS invokation code path. Anyways, installing the JAX-RPC handler with call.getService().getHandlerRegistry().getHandlerChain() leaves serialization intact. But now with the effect that the handler is not only invoked just before sending, but after the receive, too. So far we could not find a property to silently return when handling the response. Best regards, Robert > -----Original Message----- > From: Dittmann, Werner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Friday, July 22, 2005 8:11 AM > To: Robert Sauer; [email protected] > Subject: AW: ws-sec req/resp symmetry > > Robter, > usually this is not required. It depends on the setup of your > deployment files on the client side. You can setup the > request and the response path independently. > > BTW, which handler do you use? The JAX-RPX compliant handler > or the WSDoAll* pair of handlers? > > Regards, > Werner > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > > Von: Robert Sauer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Gesendet: Freitag, 22. Juli 2005 07:39 > > An: [email protected] > > Betreff: ws-sec req/resp symmetry > > > > > > Greetings, > > > > this seems to be more of a spec question, but I was not > able to find > > it yesterday. The scenario is as follows: > > > > When sending authentication enabled requests, we include > for instance > > username/password info with the request by using the > WSS4JHandler. The > > problem now is that when the response arrives, the same handler is > > looking for ws-sec headers in it, too. When they are > missing it throws > > an exception, thus rendering the call failed. > > > > Is it really required that any response to a ws-sec enabled request > > has to include ws-sec headers, too? > > > > Best regards, > > Robert > > > > > >
