Hi Freeman, I'm sorry to disturb to you, but there is no any updates since last Friday. Could you please let me know if there is any issue in the patch I provided.
Thanks! On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Min Yang <[email protected]> wrote: > 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> >>> >>> >> >
