On Jul 20, 2006, at 4:59 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
Rick McGuire wrote:
After spending a good year+ dealing with issues involving
CorbaBean, CSSBean, and TSSBean I've come to the realization that
part of the problem with understanding how these work is the names
are misleading...particularly CSSBean and TSSBean.
TSSBean calls itself the "CORBA Target Security Service". While
some aspects of its configuration involve defining transport level
security, this bean is really a proxy that manages a POA instance
for exposing an EJB container as a CORBA object. The TSSBean
name somehow obscures the fact that there is a TSSBean instance
for every exported EJB. CorbaObjectProxy or EjbPoaProxy might be
better names.
CSSBean calls itself the "CORBA Client Security Server". Similar
problem with TSSBean. Security is only one aspect of this
bean....and it's not really a "Server". CorbaClientObject might
make it a little clearer what's being configured.
CorbaBean is not too bad, but it seems to imply a global CORBA
configuration rather than configuring a single ORB instance.
CorbaServerOrb would capture the essential server-side ORB nature
of this.
Rick
For the curious, the acronyms come from the CORBA Security spec
CSIv2. This spec outlines how the client side code, CSS, sets up
the security context with the server side code, TSS; the security
context includes the transport level security, as you had mentioned
as well as the shared security context creation and what security
information gets generated inside the IOR for the objects. The
sole purpose of these two beans is to set up these security
contexts as specified under CSIv2, IIRC.
With that said, I don't think that we should obfuscate their CSIv2
roots but, I am not married to those particular names. Just my
personal preference that you must take with a grain of salt.
Thanks for the javadoc, Alan :)
Hey Rick, if you could submit a small "javadoc" patch with this info
in it, that be great.
-David
Regards,
Alan
