Will test that - just adding some stuff from the spec as well to complete
it:

Please see: 4.2.3:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/NOTE-SOAP-20000508/#_Toc478383500 .

So it seems that a service provider must in fact accept this header - but I
cannot find a way to define it in our schemas - but will test the fix
anyway.


2011/10/3 Daniel Kulp <[email protected]>

>
> Just a quick update to mention I chatted with David on IRC:
>
>
> http://irclogs.dankulp.com/logs/irclogger_log/cxf?date=2011-10-03,Mon&sel=132#l128
>
> and figured out a possible fix that he'll test tonight.
>
> Dan
>
>
> On Monday, October 03, 2011 5:06:02 PM David Karlsen wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > We have (generated) wsdl's that look like this:
> >     <message name="SECSSecurityTokenCreate_V1_0Req">
> >         <part element="impl:SECSSecurityTokenCreate_V1_0InputArgs"
> > name="SECSSecurityTokenCreate_V1_0RequestIn"/>
> >         <part element="edb:AutHeader" name="SoapHeader"/>
> >     </message>
> >
> >
> > the edb:AutHeader is defined in another schema - and does not have any
> > mustUunderstand attributes.
> >
> > My question is not directly CXF but rather WSDL1.1 based - am I as a
> service
> > provider obliged to accept this header? And if so I guess the attribute
> > should be defined in the schema as well?
> >
> > I've read the specs but I didn't get a clear answer from reading them.
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > David J. M. Karlsen - http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidkarlsen
> --
> Daniel Kulp
> [email protected]
> http://dankulp.com/blog
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>



-- 
--
David J. M. Karlsen - http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidkarlsen

Reply via email to