On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 12:32 AM, Marc Giger <[email protected]> wrote:

> Dear WS-devs,
>
> At the moment there are at least 4 AssertionBuilder and 3 Assertion
> classes per WS-Security-Policy-Assertion.
> The original Rampart ones, the CXF ones lent by rampart and my classes
> (swssf) lent by Rampart.
> All of you, which did contribute to the policy implementations, know how
> much time it takes to implement
> it and how complicated it can be.
>
> The attached patch is a first try/draft/proposal to to get rid of this
> overhead so that we can use a common code base.
> It is of course not intended for inclusion but to start a discussion about
> requirements.
>
> The provided patch should show you
> - the support of neested policies and its normalization (attached is a
> sample policy in compact form
> and its normalized version which was normalized with the code in the patch)
> - the simplification of the multiple Policy-Versions handling
> - generic (simple) method and class to do the final assert of an
> alternative
>
> The axis/rampart developers will note that the builders are using the
> W3C-DOM implementation instead of the axiom framework.
> The rationale is that no additional dependencies are needed, DOM is an
> official standard and we aren't in a "hot-path"
> (Normally the policy will be build once during the whole runtime). So,
> this shouldn't be a big deal.
>
> There is an alternative to the proposed concept. Build the policy without
> the builders and call the concrete builders during
> normalization or during other structural changes. The primitive assertion
> objects can be hold behind the scene to allow
> structural changes all the time.
>
> Before I invest more time I want to make sure the asf-dev-community is in
> favor and the result will be accepted.
>
> What do you think?
>
> I agree [ ]
> I disagree [ ]
> I don't care [ ]
>

+1 I agree [X]

Thanks & regards,
-Prabath



> What do you want?, it is perfect as it is! [ ]
>
> I'm willing to help [ ]


> Comments/notes/concerns/objections/ideas?
>
> Please share your opinion!
>
> Thanks
>
> Marc
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>



-- 
Thanks & Regards,
Prabath

http://blog.facilelogin.com
http://RampartFAQ.com

Reply via email to