If we go the SOAPonJMS path, this is yet another can of worms since the SOAPonJMS binding WG at W3C is still working on how this should be done in a standard way. So a SOAP on JMS binding can only be proprietary as of to-day.
In my use case, I need to stick to JAX-WS programming, SOAP (1.1 or 1.2) on http and WS-Addressing Im am confused because axis2 provides a boolean for wireasync. How come, wher is the magic, since the inferenences which the toolkit can make from WS-Adressing programming (ReplyTo, FaultTo) are potentially the same? jacques dkulp wrote: > > > The JMS transport kind of does it. When the response comes in, it calls > back > on the observer with the message. This is usually on a different thread. > It's the frontend code that doesn't have the complete support for this > style > of mapping. It's the thing that is sitting on the forground thread > waiting > for that message to appear. The JAX-WS frontend does have support for > the > async callback things, but that's just mapping a sync call onto a > background > thread. The "ClientImpl" thing would need some updating to truely > support > this correctly. > > Dan > > > On Tuesday 05 August 2008 5:46:43 am TALBOT Jacques (TJA) wrote: >> Really, nobody cares, or is it just august ... :-( >> >> ________________________________ >> >> Asynchronous Request Reply MEP >> >> With CXF, how do you specify asynchronous over the wire (as opposed to >> asynchronous simulated by the toolkit library), with 2 independents SOAP >> exchanges for the Request and the Reply, perhaps hours apart? >> >> In axis2, there is a wireasync boolean. >> >> Thanks >> >> ___________________________________________ >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mobile: 06 07 83 42 00 >> >> >> >> >> >> -- > > > > -- > Daniel Kulp > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://www.dankulp.com/blog > > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Re-%3A-Asynchronous-Request-Reply-MEP----nobody-interested---tp18827832p18903973.html Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
