Hi On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 4:34 PM, David Valeri <[email protected]> wrote:
> In order to get any of them to run I had to do major surgery on the > modules. > Microsoft moved servers and changed TLS certificates. Furthermore, the > version numbers don't line up correctly like you said and all sorts of > headaches result. I recently made changes to WS-T related code and had the > tests working as best I could tell, but they are still really brittle and I > may have introduced a regression. I made a note of what I had to do in > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-2909. There needs to be some > effort expended in getting these updated, but I couldn't find any > information about the MS servers in order to accurately update > interopfest's > configuration. > > I've went through all the merges which have been done since CXF 2.2.9 was released (about 09 June) and after reverting all the changes one by one made to STSClient and AsymmetricBindingHandler, I was able to see the wstrust10 client demo running 'OK' again. Note that not until I reverted the following (and the last) one, with http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/svn-commit-r980941-in-cxf-trunk-rt-ws-security-src-main-java-org-apache-cxf-ws-security-wss4j-policy-td2260083.html#a2260083 was I able to see the green light. I've then reverted all my local changes and only applied the changes made in the above commit to AsymmetricBindingHandler only but it did not work again so it does look like the affecting changes are spread either through multiple commits or all the above commit needs to be reverted. David, can you please look at this issue ? You've obviously done the changes for the good reasons but as it happens wstrust10 test is not working at the moment so it looks like the legacy servers are not liking the changes. May be we can introduce some contextual properties so that say AsymmetricBindingHandler (and may be STSClient) do what they used to do when working with wstrust 10 servers ? cheers, Sergey > -----Original Message----- > From: Sergey Beryozkin [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Thursday, August 19, 2010 8:14 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Regressions in WS-Trust 10 interopfest demo > > All of those NoSuchMethodError exceptions have been probably caused by the > fact I was building sandbox projects depending on outdated 2.3-SNAPSHOT > views, so after removing the cxf artifacts from the maven repo I can the > exceptions gone. > > However, it does appear we have a regression in scenarios 9 and 10 : > > Scenario_9_IssuedTokenForCertificate_MutualCertificate11: Exception: > javax.xml.ws.soap.SOAPFaultException: An error occurred when verifying > security for the message. > > Scenario_10_IssuedTokenForCertificateSecureConversation_MutualCertificate11: > Exception: javax.xml.ws.soap.SOAPFaultException: An error occurred when > verifying security for the message. > > Has anyone worked in this area recently ? I'm going to start looking into > it > as well... > > cheers, Sergey > > On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 11:55 AM, Sergey Beryozkin > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > Hi > > > > I'm seeing all sorts of problems when running > > samples/ws_security/interopfest/wstrust10, both in 2.3.0-SNAPSHOT and on > > 2.2.x. > > I did run the demo last week and it worked for me but today it is just > all > > failing. > > > > In 2.3.0-SNAPSHOT I had to update the version of maven-ant-run plugin to > > 1.4 just to get the build working, but besides that I'm seeingucuch > > some strange errors like > > > > java.lang.NoSuchMethodError: > > > > org.apache.cxf.ws.security.trust.STSClient.setPolicy(Lorg/apache/neethi/Poli > cy;)V > > at > > > > org.apache.cxf.ws.security.policy.interceptors.SecureConversationTokenInterc > > eptorProvider.setupClient(SecureConversationTokenInterceptorProvider.java:16 > 7) > > > > even though I can see STSClient.setPolicy(Object policy) method... > > > > In 2.2.x, the problem is that CXF version gets resolved to > 2.3.0-SNAPSHOT, > > setting the version to 2.2.11-SNAPSHOT results in the async binding test > > failures. > > > > Can someone please give it a try and confirm it is just not me only ? > Now, > > assuming there're regressions, I'd have to start investigating. Given > that > > I'm a bit raw so to say in this area, any help will be appreciated > > > > thanks, Sergey > > > > > >
