The main problem is that the spec does not say anything about
what a component should be and how it should handle its service units.
The main point is that the content of a service unit is completely
specific to a component.
The component if free to support or not service unit deployment
(if it does not support SUs, it should not have a ServiceUnitManager).

Wrt to WSDL, the spec says each JBI endpoint MUST have a WSDL
description.  This has been relaxed in ServiceMix, so that endpoint
MAY have a WSDL description.  The components are responsible
for providing this description, either by looking at some resources
in the SU, or any other mean (generating WSDL at runtime ...)

What problems did you had, exactly ?

On 1/4/07, didi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Hello dear JBI/ESB experts,

trying to put together some standard conform JBI Service Engines we
investigated some components that are called JBI standard compliant ...
however it does not seem to be that easy to exchange the JBI components
between the different ESB implementations (e.g. ServiceMix, Petals, OpenESB,
...). It is also difficult to figure out the correct answers in the JSR-208
Spec.

Here some questions which someone of you might find the time to answer:
- Is a WSDL description of the components mandatory?
- Is the WSDL part of the Component that can be installed, or must it be
part of a ServiceUnit using that component? And if yes why does ServiceMix
not so.
- Is it mandatory to implement the ServiceUnitManager for JBI components?

My understanding is that a component that is free of the context (port,
endpoint) in which it will be used can be installed into an JBI Container
and the context information, i.e. ServiceEndpoint (Binding) is provided in a
seperatly deployed ServiceUnit/ServiceAssembly ...

Hope you can help to clear the fog around that topic.

Best Regards,
Christian
--
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/WSDL-Description-mandatory-in-JBI-Spec--tf2920566s12049.html#a8162700
Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.




--
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet

Reply via email to