[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-6865?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13800627#comment-13800627
]
Sergey Beryozkin edited comment on CAMEL-6865 at 10/21/13 12:58 PM:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Willem
My understanding is that it is possible to control it with the header filter
strategies, right ?
So, see this email where a user is unexpectedly 'surprised' that the headers
are visible further down the route:
http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/CXF-rest-service-route-copies-all-request-headers-to-response-tp5741613.html
The question is, what is a typical use case where CXF RS (and indeed CXF WS) is
used. Do users want to combine it with other Camel HTTP components ? So far I
think users either use it or not, i.e, I haven't seen users trying CXFRS &
Camel HTTP or Jetty.
Which brings me to the idea of supporting the principle of the least surprise.
Of course, the users can apply a filter to ensure that the headers are not
visible to the next components which follow CXF RS, but if the mainstream use
of CXF RS does not involve combining it with other Camel HTTP components then
blocking the headers by default means it is less work for the users; those
users who do need such headers visible later can configure CXF RS appropriately.
It is not a major issue as far as I'm concerned, but IMHO changing the current
default behavior can positively affect the experience of camel-cxf users
Cheers, Sergey
was (Author: sergey_beryozkin):
Hi Willem
My understanding is that it is possible to control it with the header filter
strategies, right ?
So, see this email where a user is unexpectedly 'surprised' that the headers
are visible further down the route:
http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/CXF-rest-service-route-copies-all-request-headers-to-response-tp5741613.html
The question is, what is typical use case where CXF RS is used (and indeed CXF
WS) . Do users want to combine it with other Camel HTTP components ? So far I
think users either use it or not, i.e, I haven't seen users trying CXFRS &
Camel HTTP or Jetty.
Which brings me to the idea of supporting the principle of the least surprise.
Of course, the users can apply a filter to ensure that the headers are not
visible to the next components which follow CXF RS, but if what the mainstream
use of CXF RS does not involve combining it with other Camel HTTP components
then blocking the headers by default means it is less work for the users; those
users who do need such headers visible later can configure CXF RS appropriately.
It is not a major issue as far as I'm concerned, but IMHO changing the current
default behavior can positively affect the experience of camel-cxf users
Cheers, Sergey
> Investigate if CXF RS component can make in HTTP headers not visible to the
> rest of the route
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CAMEL-6865
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAMEL-6865
> Project: Camel
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: camel-cxf
> Affects Versions: 2.12.1
> Reporter: Sergey Beryozkin
> Priority: Minor
>
> According to the user reports, CXF RS component can make the incoming HTTP
> headers visible to the components which follow it, IMHO by default such
> headers should only be visible to CXF endpoint.
> Check if it is realistic to do it.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1#6144)
