Hi Freeman, I saw you have assgin the JIRA I opened to you last Friday, not sure if you have chance to review the patch I submitted, any issues you found in that patch?
On Fri, Mar 8, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Min Yang <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Freeman, > > I have attach the patch for the issue, please review it. > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-4876 > Any problems please let me know, thanks! > > On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 11:51 AM, Freeman Fang <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I've checked the JAXWS 2.2 spec, the related part is like >> >> 6.5.3 javax.xml.ws.RespectBindingFeature >> >> The RespectBindingFeature is used to control whether a JAX-WS >> implementation MUST respect/honor the contents of the wsdl:binding >> associated with an endpoint. It has a corresponding RespectBinding >> annotation described in section 7.14.3. >> >> ♦ Conformance (javax.xml.ws.RespectBindingFeature): When the >> javax.xml.ws.RespectBindingFeature is enabled, a JAX-WS implementation MUST >> inspect the wsdl:binding at runtime to determine result and parameter >> bindings as well as any wsdl:extensions that have the required=true >> attribute. All required wsdl:extensions MUST be supported and honored by a >> JAX-WS implementation unless a specific wsdl:extension has be explicitly >> disabled via a WebServiceFeature. >> >> Per the spec, yeah, I'd say this is something CXF should follow, would >> you please create a jira to track it? And patch is welcomed, as always. >> >> －－－－－－－－－－－－－ >> Freeman(Yue) Fang >> >> Red Hat, Inc. >> FuseSource is now part of Red Hat >> Web: http://fusesource.com | http://www.redhat.com/ >> Twitter: freemanfang >> Blog: http://freemanfang.blogspot.com >> http://blog.sina.com.cn/u/1473905042 >> weibo: @Freeman小屋 >> >> On 2013-3-5, at 下午3:36, Min Yang wrote: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > When we test our application that enabled the RespectBinding feature, we >> > found an issue in cxf-2.6.2. The issue is if we add an invalid binding >> > under wsdl:binding element as you can see in below, a >> WebServiceException >> > will be throw out when accessing the endpoint first time, and the >> endpoint >> > will not be accessed, this is behavior is correct. >> > >> > <binding name="EchoPortBinding" type="tns:Echo"> >> > <soap:binding transport="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/http"; >> > style="document"/> >> > <tns:badBinding wsdl:required="true" uri="http://bad/bad"; >> xmlns:wsdl=" >> > http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/"; /> >> > <operation name="echo"> >> > <soap:operation soapAction=""/> >> > <input> >> > <soap:body use="literal"/> >> > </input> >> > <output> >> > <soap:body use="literal"/> >> > </output> >> > <fault name="Exception"> >> > <soap:fault name="Exception" use="literal"/> >> > </fault> >> > </operation> >> > </binding> >> > >> > But if we add the invalid binding under operation or its sub element >> > (input, output or fault), like the example in below, then cxf will not >> > check it, and the endpoint would be access after deployment, although >> the >> > wsdl4j has deserialize it as an unkown element. So I think this should >> be a >> > cxf defect, please confirm it. Thanks! >> > >> > <binding name="EchoPortBinding" type="tns:Echo"> >> > <soap:binding transport="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/http"; >> > style="document"/> >> > <operation name="echo"> >> > <soap:operation soapAction=""/> >> > <tns:badBinding wsdl:required="true" uri="http://bad/bad"; >> xmlns:wsdl=" >> > http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/wsdl/"; /> >> > <input> >> > <soap:body use="literal"/> >> > </input> >> > <output> >> > <soap:body use="literal"/> >> > </output> >> > <fault name="Exception"> >> > <soap:fault name="Exception" use="literal"/> >> > </fault> >> > </operation> >> > </binding> >> >> >
