Hi Dirk, The transform itself should actually take place with the original interceptor, as the actual output object is replaced with the stax-transform'ed XMLStreamWriter regardless of its role. So, I am not sure why your scenario was not working initially. But I am not sure why the special requester role handling that you mentioned is there. Maybe Sergey knows it?
I don't quite follow your second point. Your consumer endpoint uses WSDL-B and it can accept the B's namespace and in addition, as the transform feature configured, it can accept the A's namespace. The transform feature makes sure that the messages are forwarded using the B's namespace so that they matche the service interface. If you need WSDL-A, you can host this file somewhere else. So, I am not familiar with your use case. The transform feature is typically used as a workaround to support those legacy clients that had the WSDL from elsewhere that don't match the actual service's WSDL.So, the actual endpoint doesn't have to provide the alternative WSDL. regards, aki 2015-01-21 8:35 GMT+01:00 Dirk Lattermann - expertplace <dirk.latterm...@expertplace.de>: > Hi, > > thanks for your answer! > > The intention is different: > > Working routing is: > > from CXF-B(1) --> (if ..some condition..) --> to CXF-B(2) on different host > > additional, a namespace mapping is needed: > > from CXF-A --> namespace mapping A to B --> to CXF-B(1) so that above > route is taken > > the "namespace mapping A to B" must include mapping the response back from > namespace B to A. > > What I have working or the mapping is an consuming endpoint servicing the B > namespace (not good because it offers the wrong WSDL to the client), > configured with StaxTransformationFeature with inTransformElements (namespace > A to B). > For the response, StaxTransformationFeature with outTransformElements doesn't > work: digging in the source I found that TransformationOutInterceptor has a > condition that prevents transforming responses. Only outgoing requests are > mapped (that is, in producer mode). Curiously, the > TransformationInInterceptor doesn't have this restriction. > > I solved this by copying the TransformationOutInterceptor into a new class > and removing the if condition in line 100. Then, I added this new class as an > outInterceptor to the endpoint. Now the mapping works for the requests and > the responses! > > The only drawback: my incoming mapping endpoint uses the wrong WSDL file (for > namespace B instead of namespace A). > Is there a Phase in the CXF processing to which the > TransformationInInterceptor could be attached so that CXF wouldn't complain > about a namespace mismatch when using WSDL for namespace A and transforming > the incoming message to namespace B? > > Thank you, > Dirk > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- > Von: Aki Yoshida [mailto:elak...@gmail.com] > Gesendet: Dienstag, 20. Januar 2015 11:10 > An: users@camel.apache.org > Betreff: Re: Camel-CXF: Problems transforming namespace of incoming message > > I don't think the http endpoint can be used to bridge typical soap webservice > calls, as there are some mismatches in the behavior between the soap protocol > and the plain http protocol. > > If I understand your scenario, you want to do something like from-cxf:A ---> > to-cxf:A if ...some condition... > from-cxf:A ----> to-cxf:B if ...some condition... > and cxf:A-> cxf:B requires a minor namespace replacement, no? > > In that case, you can just use the PAYLOAD mode for all the cxf endpoints and > configure the transform feature at the to-cxf:B endpoint to replace the > namespace. > > > > > 2015-01-19 17:29 GMT+01:00 Dirk Lattermann - expertplace > <dirk.latterm...@expertplace.de>: >> Hello, >> >> we need to build a proxy for an external request/reply SOAP web service. >> This same service must be offered both unmodified (namespace A) and with a >> different namespace B in the message schema. In both cases, some additional >> routing decisions must be taken. >> >> For this, we have defined a CXF producer endpoint (using cxf:cxfEndpoint) in >> POJO message format that addresses the external service, using their WSDL >> (namespace A). The unmodified proxy on the consuming (input) side is also a >> CXF endpoint in POJO format, using the same WSDL. A route forwards (after >> some routing decisions) from this to the external service; this works. >> >> To offer the service with a different namespaces, we tried several >> approaches without success. >> >> One possibility seems to be a CXF consumer endpoint in MESSAGE message >> format that uses a StaxTransformationFeature to modify the namespace from B >> to A. >> This endpoint uses a modified WSDL with namespace B instead of A. It must >> use MESSAGE, not POJO, because the WSDL file with the modified message >> namespace B would not match the transformed message in namespace A, which >> results in a parsing (JAXB) exception from CXF. We would like to send the >> transformed message to our own namespace A consumer endpoint to run through >> the normal routing decisions mentioned above. We cannot use the POJO >> endpoint because the message is in MESSAGE format. So, we tried POSTing the >> message using the HTTP component: >> >> <route id="cxf-admin-nsmap-route"> >> <from uri="cxf:bean:fc-admin-service"/> >> <to >> uri="http://${fc.endpoint.host}:${fc.endpoint.port}/${fc.admin_cxf_nsm >> od.endpoint.path}"/> >> </route> >> >> This fails with >> >> Invalid uri: /fc/admin. If you are forwarding/bridging http endpoints, >> then enable the bridgeEndpoint option on the endpoint: >> Endpoint[http://$%7Bfc.endpoint.host%7D:$%7Bfc.endpoint.port%7D/$%7Bfc >> .admin_cxf_nsmod.endpoint.path%7D] >> >> /fc/admin is the path for the incoming request (defined by >> cxf:bean:fc-admin-service), not the one defined in the to-uri >> (${fc.admin_cxf_nsmod.endpoint.path}). >> >> We tried to add the bridgeEndpoint property as in >> >> <route id="cxf-admin-nsmap-route"> >> <from uri="cxf:bean:fc-admin-service"/> >> <to >> uri="http://${fc.endpoint.host}:${fc.endpoint.port}/${fc.admin_cxf_nsm >> od.endpoint.path}?bridgeEndpoint=true"/> >> </route> >> >> This fails with >> >> org.apache.commons.httpclient.URIException: Invalid authority >> >> >> A different approach where we tried XSLT to transform the namespaces, use >> JAXB unmarshalling and create a MessageContentsList to convert the message >> into POJO format by hand which can then be sent into the routing decision >> route directly leads to difficulties with marshalling the response back: the >> namespace prefix for the type names in (as xsd in xsi:type="xsd:string") >> gets lost. On top, this approach seems still uglier an less maintainable >> than the first one I described. >> >> What might be a working and clean, simple, maybe even elegant solution to >> this problem? It's simply mapping a message in one namespace to another! >> >> Thank you, >> Dirk >> >>
