Hi, I think you are right. There seems to be an issue with the wrong action case and it seems like the fault is not sent back. I'll look into it now. regards, aki
2012/11/22 wsdev2012 <[email protected]>: > Hi, > I have a web service "wsdl first" with wsdl 1.1 and soap 1.2. > Reading WS-I - R1144 > and SOAP 1.2 Addressing 1.0 Feature > > if the action attribute inside the http header Content-Type is provided it > has to be processed and validated with the soap:operation/@soapAction and > was:Action header. > > but CXF seems to handle faults in a non standard way: > SoapActionInInterceptor throws a general Fault instead of > was:InvalidAddressingHeader if the action attribute from http header > Content-Type is not correct (different value from the one inside the WSDL > soap:operation/@soapAction being called or provided soap header > "wsa:Action") > > throw new Fault("SOAP_ACTION_MISMATCH", LOG, null, action); > > > I have also another question, if the soap:operation/@soapAction in the WSDL > is empty shouldn't it be calculated by CXF using the default action patter > as described here > http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/CR-ws-addr-wsdl-20060529/#defactionwsdl11 and > compared to http header action attribute inside Content-Type? > > thank you. > > regards, > Paolo > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/SOAPAction-tp5718944.html > Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
