I don't understand what the difference between WSclient and your soap request. What do you mean ? I don't understand the difference between WS and http/soap in your schema.
The HTTP BC will handle incoming http request (either soap or not, depending on the configuration), and you can route exchanges to any other JBI endpoint you want: it could also be another HTTP BC which would send another HTTP request, or a JMS endpoint, or any SE ... On 1/31/07, wizard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I see what you mean. We have this up and running: |--Client--||------------SMIX----------| (request) soap(ssl)--->http(BC)----->ourSEs (answer) soap(ssl)<---http(BC)<-----ourSEs Working flawlessly! :D What we are trying to implement now is: |--Client--||------------SMIX------------| (request) WSclient----->WS(http/etc?)-->ourSEs (...and then answer...) Is it possible? JSR181 (wsdl-first example) seems to be: |--Client--||----------------SMIX-----------------| (request) WSclient----->WS(http)-->JSR181(with POJO) I'm I wrong? gnodet wrote: > > I guess i'm a bit lost here. > THere's no relationship between the jsr181 component and soap/http. > You can expose any service you want provided that you put > an http endpoint in front of it. > What kind of problem do you have ? > > On 1/31/07, wizard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> >> Anyone have any hints on these questions? >> >> >> dgoodine wrote: >> > >> > 1. It seems that alot of people start with the JSR181 service unit and >> > HTTP since it's a bit simpler model, but there's very little >> > discussion/documentation/demos for implementing your services in a >> Service >> > Engine. I'd prefer the latter, since it allows better abstraction (you >> > can build abstract classes for all the Endpoint, Component, etc., >> > requiring minimal coding for new engines and allowing common >> > functionality). It also seems a little more natural to the JBI spec to >> > expose services directly to the NMR rather than burying them inside >> > another component. >> > >> >> It this really the best practice? >> >> I believe it is, but I'm dealing with the same question. We have created >> SE's that are used by our SAs/SUs. Whenever I try to expose some >> functionality through WebServices, the only solution I find is using >> JSR181... This only leads to a POJO inside a component, without using >> JBI. >> To achieve that, why not use a standalone WS in a J2EE server? Shouldn't >> ServiceMix take advantage of JBI in some way, and already created SEs? >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://www.nabble.com/A-few-questions-about-SEs-and-WSDL-tf3053641s12049.html#a8728254 >> Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >> > > > -- > Cheers, > Guillaume Nodet > ------------------------ > Architect, LogicBlaze (http://www.logicblaze.com/) > Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/ > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/A-few-questions-about-SEs-and-WSDL-tf3053641s12049.html#a8728500 Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Architect, LogicBlaze (http://www.logicblaze.com/) Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
