Mathias, The MEP is used to indicate the kind of interaction you want with the service.
The InOnly MEP you are using means that you'll be receiving a message, but you won't be sending back a reponse message. From the HTTP point of view, this means that a POST will just be answered with an HTTP status 202 (OK) but nothing else. You can combine this with e.g. a file sender or a jms provider, which just store the message somewhere. If you specify an InOut MEP on the HTTP consumer endpoint, this means we will be sending back a response message. If you would do the HTTP POST from a browser, you would see the response XML message as a result of your POST. This also means that you would have to send the message exchange to an endpoint that is capable of creating a reply, e.g. a servicemix-bean or some external web service call. Does this clarify the meaning of the MEP attribute for you? If your flow is behaving as expected, you probably picked the right MEP. If you still have doubts on which MEP is appropriate for you, could you provide us with a bit more detail on what you're trying to achieve? Regards, Gert Vanthienen ------------------------ Open Source SOA: http://fusesource.com Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/ 2009/5/27 mast <[email protected]>: > > I actually wrote the first sample by using a http-marshaller class. > At the time of writing it was the only familiar way for me when having to > validate the incoming xml against an xsd. I will definitely try to make use > of the camel validation component in the future. > > When sending pure non soap "xml" over http to an http-consumer-su, what mep > type should I use? > I'm using this as default: > http://www.w3.org/2004/08/wsdl/in-only > > But are there other ones out there that is preferable? > > BR > Mathias > > > Gert Vanthienen wrote: >> >> Matthias, >> >> The benefit of creating a Marshaler for that, would be that the >> validation happens very early on and you don't need to route invalid >> messages through the ESB. You can just code this up as you would >> usually do validation, reading the XSD resource off the classpath or >> allow people to specify a uri (either classpath or file or whatever) >> to the resource on the Marshaler configuration. >> >> However, other than that the little excess routing, I don't see many >> advantages to building this thing yourself. Personally, I would use a >> Camel route with the Camel MSV (aka >> http://camel.apache.org/validation.html) in there to start with. You >> can always start coding things up yourself if you're really >> experiencing any problems with the overhead, but if you're using the >> SedaFlow and all exchanges are just flowing around in memory, I don't >> think it will be an issue. >> >> Regards, >> >> Gert Vanthienen >> ------------------------ >> Open Source SOA: http://fusesource.com >> Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/ >> >> >> >> 2009/5/27 mast <[email protected]>: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I would like to validate an incoming xml structure that i receives from >>> an >>> http request against an xsd. >>> My setup so far is: >>> >>> http req -> http consumer su -> DefaultHttpConsumerMarshaler -> sending >>> the >>> received xml further down the message exchange chain -> eip router -> >>> validate xml -> routes the xml to a jms provider. >>> >>> My question is, what setup would be a good solution for this? >>> Where should i preferable validate the incoming xml? If the answer is in >>> the >>> marshaller, how can I then retrieve the xsd that I would like to validate >>> against? Or should i use camel and from there validate the xml? >>> >>> I'am using SMX 3.3. >>> >>> BR >>> Mathias >>> >>> >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://www.nabble.com/XML-validating-against-XSD-best-approach-scenario-tp23740272p23740272.html >>> Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> >>> >> >> >> ----- >> --- >> Gert Vanthienen >> http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com >> > > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/XML-validating-against-XSD-best-approach-scenario-tp23740272p23746947.html > Sent from the ServiceMix - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >
