SOAP is a wire level protocol similar to RMI's JRMP or IIOP. Now to clarify your requirements even further.
1) You have a number of VB clients. 2) Your data format to exchange between clients and servers is to be XML. 3) Your servers/services are written in Java (from your WLS references). 4) The actual communication protocol is still open-ended. 5) You seem to have everything within the same network (e.g. no firewall issues) With #4 open, there are many choices available to accomplish what you need. JMS, there are a number of implementations that provide COM interfaces IIOP, CORBA or even RMI/iiop classic RMI over JRMP, this is a little bit tricker as you need some type of client site interface to COM -- this client site interface can translate your pure Java objects (ala JAXB) into XML for VB consumption. To talk to COM, you can try a number of COM bridges. I hope this helps, francis >> -----Original Message----- >> From: soap beginner [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2001 5:45 AM >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Subject: Re: SOAP over RMI, Pointless? >> >> >> No we hava a VB Client, but s strict requirment to >> communicate using XML. We cannot use HTTP. We may add >> more clients eventually, or be able to use HTTP. Why >> write something to interpret XML to call services when >> its already been done? >> >> The client will be taking to use using COM or RMI. >> I don't see any other option. CORBA would maybe be an >> option, but the XML requirement is stuck. Also SOAP >> will give us very loose coupling between Client and >> server. Does this make sense? >> >> Also I could use a good answer to my RPCRouter >> questions. >> >> Thanks again >> >> Paul >> >> >> --- Dmitri Colebatch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> let me get this straight... you're going to have a >> > Java client, and a Java >> > server, and do the communication over RMI, but have >> > the method invocation >> > done using SOAP? By the sounds of things you >> > realise this isn't exactly, >> > ahem, ideal,... but are having trouble convincing a >> > client? >> > >> > IMHO: >> > >> > RMI: where you can, if you have Java client, Java >> > server, no firewall >> > SOAP/HTTP: if you have to communicate over firewall, >> > or maybe if you have >> > a non-Java client/server (but then I'd think CORBA >> > would fit the bill >> > better wouldn't it?) >> > >> > SOAP/RMI seems pointless to me... which I hope is >> > simply concurring with >> > your statement. >> > >> > cheers >> > dim >> > >> > On Sat, 29 Sep 2001, [iso-8859-1] soap beginner >> > wrote: >> > >> > > We have a requirement do let a client call >> > services on >> > > our server using XML messages. We think SOAP fits >> > this >> > > bill. However , we have problems persuading the >> > > cusomter to use HTTP. Is it too much of an >> > overhead to >> > > use SOAP over RMI? Are they meant to be a similar >> > > thing? >> > > >> > > This isn't the main point of my question. >> > > If we decided that we were going to use SOAP over >> > RMI, >> > > we need a good way to access SOAP on the server >> > side. >> > > ie bypassing the servlet. I have looked at the >> > source >> > > code for the servlet. It does a lot of stuff HTTP >> > > dependant. I have also looked at RPCRouter.java. >> > This >> > > seems to be what I need to call SOAP from a >> > stateless >> > > session EJB for example. However I think I could >> > give >> > > Envelope.unmarshall an XML SOAP document, but from >> > > what I can see this is far away from what I need >> > to >> > > do. >> > > I suspect the SOAP services will still be >> > administered >> > > using the servlet. The issue I think I will have >> > will >> > > be classloaders in WLS 6.1. ie the WAR file where >> > SOAP >> > > will be, would be in a child classloader of the >> > EJB >> > > (in the same EAR). Therefore any servicemanager >> > > objects or any singletons may exist more than >> > once. >> > > Will this be a problem? Has anybody got any >> > example >> > > code to go from a SOAP request XML document, to a >> > > calling a SOAP service (living in the same >> > process), >> > > but administered by the web app? >> > > >> > > I hope this makes a little bit fo sense ;-) >> > > >> > > Any help appreciated >> > > >> > > Paul >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> ____________________________________________________________ >> > > Do You Yahoo!? >> > > Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at >> > http://mail.yahoo.co.uk >> > > or your free @yahoo.ie address at >> > http://mail.yahoo.ie >> > > >> > >> >> ____________________________________________________________ >> Do You Yahoo!? >> Get your free @yahoo.co.uk address at http://mail.yahoo.co.uk >> or your free @yahoo.ie address at http://mail.yahoo.ie
