Hi Guys, +1 For the change. There is another change I would like to propose here. Addressing comes with a AddressingValidationHandler which throws an exception if dispatching has not been done when addressing is present. If we move this to the Addressing Phase as well none of the other dispatchers will work when Addressing is present.
This may be theoretically correct. But there may be scenarios where we need the other dispatchers to work even when addressing is present. For example the SequenceIDDIspatcher we introduced in Sandesha2 does the service dispatching based of the WSRM sequence ID. I think we need to have the flexibility in Axis2 to allow the addition of such features. So my proposal is the keep the addressing handlers and the dispachers in the Addressing phase. But to move the validation handler back. Somewhere after dispatchers. Either we can add this as a postCondition fo the Dispatch phase. Or we can add a new DispatchValidation Phase. Chamikara On 7/25/07, Jaliya Ekanayake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
+1 for adding a new phase and resolve the issue. That way it clear for anybody to figure out the order Addressing->Security->RM -jaliya ----- Original Message ----- From: "Deepal Jayasinghe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 4:35 AM Subject: Re: [Axis2]Secure + Reliable with SMTP issue >I will introduce a new phase called "Addressing " and go forward , let's > revert that if we found and issue. > > Thanks > Deepal > > Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote: >> +1 ... I think we need to ship an Axis2 that can compose nicely and >> easily with Rampart and Sandesha to make secure+RM work correctly for >> HTTP and SMTP (basically for all transports we support). >> >> Sanjiva. >> >> Deepal Jayasinghe wrote: >>> Hi Dims, >>> >>> No the issues is client side when someone tries to use RM+ Security then >>> he has to go and change axis2.xml. Other thing is for security to work >>> correctly it is required to have addressing based dispatcher before >>> security handlers. And using a security is common case so I think >>> default axis2.xml should support that. >>> >>> Thanks >>> Deepal >>>> Deepal, >>>> >>>> IMHO, This can be documented and fixed post 1.3 I can see folks who >>>> are working on an advanced scenario comfortable with a custom >>>> axis2.xml. >>>> >>>> thanks, >>>> dims >>>> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Chamikara Jayalath WSO2 Inc. http://wso2.com/ http://wso2.org/ - For your Oxygen needs
