Hi Colm, I made the proposal with the XML Signature component. I did not implement it as Data Formater because I found out that the signer needs quite different parameters than the verifier. For example, the signer needs as input a signature algorithm, canonicalization methods, transformation methods, whereas the verifier only needs a few input parameters like public key. A Data Formater would have the same paramerters for the marschaller and unmarschaller available, whereas in a component the different endpoints (signer and verifier) can have different parameters. At least that's my understanding.
Regards Franz On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 5:05 PM, Colm O hEigeartaigh <cohei...@apache.org>wrote: > Hi Claus, > > I hadn't actually seen that JIRA when I wrote my original mail. An > immediate question that comes to mind on looking at the patch is whether we > care about roughly aligning the configuration of the new functionality with > the existing "XML Security" DataFormat? > > For example, the supplied patch uses configuration that looks like > "xmlsecurity:sign://enveloping?keyAccessor=#accessor", whereas the existing > component uses ".marshal().secureXML(.....)". Should the new functionality > be implemented as a DataFormat as well, or does this not matter? > > Colm. > > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi > > > > There is this ticket. I assume its likely related to your proposal > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-6339 > > > > As it was a big patch and also we should double check that the source > > code is fully ASF acceptable. I think there is some schema files or > > whatnot copied from SUN/Oracle which may be a problem? Though haven't > > had the time to dive in. > > > > Would be great if you had the time to check the patch on the ticket, > > and maybe align with your work. > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Colm O hEigeartaigh > > <cohei...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Would the Camel community be interested in a XML Signature DataFormat? > It > > > would be quite similar to the existing XML Security DataFormat, except > > that > > > it would offer XML Signature instead of XML Encryption. Both could be > > used > > > together to support "sign-before-encrypt" or "encrypt-before-sign" type > > of > > > functionality. > > > > > > I have implemented a prototype, but don't want to waste any more time > in > > > case there are any objections? > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > Colm. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Colm O hEigeartaigh > > > > > > Talend Community Coder > > > http://coders.talend.com > > > > > > > > -- > > Claus Ibsen > > ----------------- > > Red Hat, Inc. > > Email: cib...@redhat.com > > Twitter: davsclaus > > Blog: http://davsclaus.com > > Author of Camel in Action: http://www.manning.com/ibsen > > > > > > -- > Colm O hEigeartaigh > > Talend Community Coder > http://coders.talend.com >
