Give 'em rope :) +1

thanks
-- dims

On 2/21/07, David Illsley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm coming back to this after focussing on other things...

I agree with everyone that mustUnderstand checking is a core, and
important (if sometimes annoying) SOAP processing rule. I also don't
advocate ANYONE deploying a SOAP web services engine that doesn't do
that checking.

That said, I'm trying to embed Axis2 where Axis2 is not the 'whole
engine' or the 'whole node'. In that case, I want to be able to insert
mustUnderstand processing which 'knows' that a given set of headers
are/were/will be understood outside of the scope of the Axis2
handlers/engine. Even if I were to put that login in a custom handler
which runs before the engine, I'd then still incur the overhead of the
AxisEngine checkMustUnderstand. This is why I'd like to move it out.

Yes, there is a chance with moving it out that a user 'undeploys' the
mustunderstand checking without replacing it. But, I'm happy to
document (in axis2.xml) that that is a supremely bad idea and that it
should only be done if you really know what you're doing.

There's plenty of rope provided by axis2 to let users hang
themselves... I think this is only another couple of inches.

David

On 23/01/07, Manoj Khangaonkar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi David,
>
> If the mustUnderstand handler runs last, that means a node cannot ignore a
> header until all the handlers have
> executed. Until the handler executes, the node does not know if it must
> process the header or not. One would think
> that a check like mustUnderstand which is fundamental to SOAP should happen
> early , not late in the cycle.
>
> If mustUnderstand=true and you ignore the header, does that not make it non
> compliant with SOAP ?
>
> Also what if some one else comes up with a requirement that their handler
> needs to run last ?
>
> Mj
>
>
> On 1/22/07, David Illsley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi all,
> > I'm looking at using the axis2 engine as part of a larger system which
> > will have a set of roles which we want respected and perhaps a set of
> > headers whcih should be ignored for mustUnderstand checking because
> > anothe rpart of the system will deal with them.
> >
> > Currently the mustUnderstand checking is simply a method in
> > AxisEngine. I'd quite like to pull this out into a handler which runs
> > last. This would have the advantage that it would be simple for other
> > people to use in a similar way (perhaps this would be useful for
> > synapse?) and reduces the complexity of AxisEngine.
> >
> > Any thoughts? Objections?
> >
> > Cheers,
> > David
> >
> > --
> > David Illsley - IBM Web Services Development
> >
> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >
>
>


--
David Illsley - IBM Web Services Development

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]




--
Davanum Srinivas :: http://wso2.org/ :: Oxygen for Web Services Developers

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to