Back in the day, I'm pretty sure that the port-specific config had
*both* the service and the port names encoded in the bean ID.
The syntax was something like
{http://foo.bar/context}SomeService/SomePort.whatever
I'm not sure though if its still possible to specify the service name in
this way, and if not what the motivation was for changing this.
/Eoghan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fred Dushin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: 05 April 2007 01:30
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: http-(conduit|destination) cfg
>
>
> The CXF https sample has bean configurations of the form:
>
> <bean name="{http://foo.bar/context}SomePort.http-conduit";
> ...> <bean
> name="{http://foo.bar/context}SomePort.http-destination"; ...>
>
> I'm trying to get a grip on the name parameter here, and its
> semantics.
>
> I understand and fully appreciate the idea that this lets you
> do configuration on a per-endpoint basis, but I think I might
> be missing something about what an endpoint is, in WSDL. I
> was always under the impression that an endpoint is more or
> less a pair of QNames -- a service qname and a port (q)name.
> Isn't that right?
>
> The config above seems to either ignore the service, or it
> chooses a default, somehow.
>
> E.g., what would happen if your services section was something like:
>
> <wsdl:service name="ServiceA">
> <wsdl:port binding="tns:SomeBinding" name="PortA">
> <soap:address location="..."/>
> </wsdl:port>
> </wsdl:service>
>
> <wsdl:service name="ServiceB">
> <wsdl:port binding="tns:SomeBinding" name="PortA">
> <!-- not a typo -->
> <soap:address location="..."/>
> </wsdl:port>
> </wsdl:service>
>
> I.e., 2 distinct services have the same port name. Is this
> prohibited in WSDL? If not, is there an alternate syntax for
> conduits and destinations that allows you to specify the
> service in which a port is defined?
>
> Again, apologies for the naive questions. If you'd prefer,
> you can tell me to go RTFS.
>
> -Fred
>
