Isn't this type of "backchannel" delivery covered by WS-MakeConnection
(http://docs.oasis-open.org/ws-rx/wsmc/200702)

On a related note, are there any plans to implement the newer OASIS WS-RX
specs (WS-ReliableMessaging and WS-MakeConnection)?


dkulp wrote:
> 
> On Tue June 9 2009 11:02:15 am sol myr wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Does CXF support WS-Polling (http://www.w3.org/Submission/ws-polling/)?
> 
> Nope.    I actually had to find someone that new something about it to
> give me 
> some history on it as this is one of the WS-* things I really hadn't heard 
> much about.   (Thanks for the chat Glen Daniels!)
> 
> Basically, from a "spec" standpoint, it doesn't look like it has really
> gone 
> anywhere.   Submitted in 2005, and pretty much nothing since then.  
> Neither 
> Glen (PMC of WS/Axis2) nor I could really find anyone that has implemented
> it.   
> 
> That said, it's not a bad idea and definitely would have some use cases.
> 
> 
>> Or some similar mechanism for one-way HTTP connections?
>>
>> For those unfamiliar with WS-Polling, please note it's not
>> "response.isDone() polling"...
>>
>> WS-Polling means that when a service finishes calculating a response,
>> it doesn't send it back to the client, but rather stores it on the
>> server machine, until the client asks (polls) for it, using a dedicated
>> protocol.
> 
> In CXF, this part really wouldn't be that hard to implement.    An
> interceptor 
> that runs immediately after the ServiceInvoker interceptor could store the 
> message/exchange in a map on the Service or similar and then pause the
> chain.    
> When a request comes in to obtain the result, look it up from the Service
> and 
> resume the chain.   Obviously some protocol mapping in there, but nothing 
> major and no different than what is done for WS-SecureConversation and 
> similar.
> 
> 
>> That's low-level control on the way/timing responses travel on the wire
>> - as opposed to "response.isDone()" which is an abstract API that
>> assumes nothing about the underlying connection management (we would be
>> glad if this API could transparently use WS-Polling behind the scenes).
> 
> THIS is where the harder part is in CXF.   This would require some
> refactoring 
> of the client side stuff to get the "isDone()" to call call back into the 
> protocol stack to get the result.   Nothing too major, but definitely
> would 
> require some more thought.
> 
> In anycase, it's definitely something that has NOT been on the radar
> screen 
> for CXF.    If it's something you'd like to tackle and submit patches
> toward 
> it, that would be great.   I'd be happy to help out "mentoring".
> 
> Dan
> 
> 
> 
>> We became interested in WS-Polling after eliminating some other options:
>>
>> - WS-ReliableMessaging is an overkill for us: our messages are not
>> critical, and don't need reliability.
>>
>> - WS-Addressing with <ReplyTo> is problematic because our clients are not
>> allowed to open a ServerSocket.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks very much.
> 
> -- 
> Daniel Kulp
> [email protected]
> http://www.dankulp.com/blog
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/-cxf--Support-for-WS-Polling%2C-or-some-other-way-one-http-connection--tp23944675p25599581.html
Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Reply via email to