Hi Richard, further comments in-line ...
> IMHO WS-RM 1.1 is the right way to do WS-RM, because this spec.
> addresses unacknowledged anonymous messages use case (see
WS-MakeConnection)
> This usecase wasn't addressed in WS-RM 1.0 and so I consider
> this old RM spec. broken.
Absolutely, the Mak
Hi Eoghan,
see in lined comments below:
Richard
Eoghan Glynn wrote:
Hi Richard,
Apologies for the delay in replying.
NP
Please see my comments in-line.
2009/6/15 Richard Opalka :
what's the current state of CXF WS-RM?
See below.
I'm asking because we'd like to integrate
Hi Richard,
Apologies for the delay in replying. Please see my comments in-line.
2009/6/15 Richard Opalka :
> what's the current state of CXF WS-RM?
See below.
> I'm asking because we'd like to integrate probably
> WS-RM in our JBossWS CXF integration.
Great that you're thinking of using CXF
Hi CXF Team,
what's the current state of CXF WS-RM?
I'm asking because we'd like to integrate probably
WS-RM in our JBossWS CXF integration.
The main questions are:
* Which WS-RM specs are supported now (I know about 1.0, is 1.1
supported already)?
* Is QoS (Quality of Service) ensured in CXF
