beside the case, what do you think on throwing Faut with subcode
was:InvalidAddressingHeader?
also, see my second question, if inside wsdl the soapAction is empty it
should fall in default action naming pattern, correct?
current implementation does not calculate the action from wsdl (but i see
the MAP classes do, and wsa:action and http header action attribute ctly
related by specifications ws-addr-soap and ws-addr-wsdl)

Thank you.
Regards
Paolo


2012/11/22 Aki Yoshida-3 [via CXF] <[email protected]>

> 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 <[hidden 
> email]<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5718972&i=0>>:
>
>
> > 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.
>
>
> ------------------------------
>  If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion
> below:
> http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/SOAPAction-tp5718944p5718972.html
>  To unsubscribe from SOAPAction, click 
> here<http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=5718944&code=cC5zcGFkYWZvcmFAZ21haWwuY29tfDU3MTg5NDR8LTQ1MzQzMDIyNA==>
> .
> NAML<http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp?macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml&base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template.NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml>
>



-- 
Paolo Spadafora




--
View this message in context: 
http://cxf.547215.n5.nabble.com/SOAPAction-tp5718944p5718974.html
Sent from the cxf-user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Reply via email to