On Thu December 3 2009 11:18:01 am Alp Timurhan Çevik wrote: > Alas, Being operable with the recent versions of .net is not adequate for > me. > > I also have to support .net 2005 etc, wcf and other stuff is not enough. Do > you have any information regarding operability for 2005 ?
Doing a couple of googles, I see several reports of interop testing between various soap stacks and stuff from early 2006 with WCF that tested MTOM. Thus, I assume it's OK. I'm not a windows person though. >> Also, I have been examining cxf's support, and without using MTOM, > everything is standart base 64, and the data is an inline data within the > element. When using mtom, yes,base 64 is present, and there are not many > differences, except the file is attached using WS-Attachment standards > (please do correct me if I am wrong). The mime type info and other stuff > are really great and useful. > > So, if mtom may introduce some problems regarding operability, I have seen > somewhere (could it be jaxws document ? Not sure. Could be web sphere > something.), mtom usage could be optional, meaning that, (if I am not > mistaken) MTOM could be enabled without worries, because not supporting > clients would still use the base64 approach. Is this information correct ? Well, not really. It's optional in that you can disable/enable it. If the server has mtom enabled, it will always respond with mtom. If a client doesn't understand mtom, it will still have a problem. > If thats the case, then no need to worry. But if I misunderstood, then > either two versions of the same web service should be present, mtom'ed and > not, or mtom should be left completely. On option COULD be to add an interceptor to the server that would detect the client (User-Agent header maybe) and turn on/off mtom depending on the client. Not sure how reliable that would be though. Dan > > Thanks again, > Alp > > 2009/12/3 Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> > > > On Thu December 3 2009 6:59:26 am Alp Timurhan Çevik wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > > > I would like to include files within a web service. The only method I > > > > have > > > > > come upon was sending data using MTOM. It seems nice, but I have > > > > questions > > > > > about interoperability, especially dotnet etc. > > > > > > If MTOM is not so interoperable, then I need an alternative to accept > > > attachments. What is the best practice on this issue ? > > > > MTOM is actually the MOST interopable of the various ways of > > accomplishing this (short of just base64 encoding the data in the soap > > message). All the > > recent versions of .NET and other soap toolkits work fine with MTOM. > > > > > > -- > > Daniel Kulp > > dk...@apache.org > > http://www.dankulp.com/blog > -- Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org http://www.dankulp.com/blog
