This is exactly in the scope of the Synapse project (uses Axis2)

thanks,
dims

On 10/18/05, Dittmann, Werner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Ash,
>
> this is outside the scope of WSS4J, but WS-Addressing may help in this
> case. AFAIK WS-Adressing is the tool/specification to use to route
> SOAP messages. There is an Apache WS project that implements
> the WS-Addressing specs. Some members here on the mailing
> list use Addressing already.
>
> Regards,
> Werner
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Abdul Ashik [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 18. Oktober 2005 11:30
> An: [email protected]
> Betreff: WSS4J & WS Broker Service
>
> Hi guys,
>
> I've got WSS4J 1.1.0 + Axis 1.2.1 working between two nodes.  My question is
> what's the best way to use it when a Web Service Broker is used?  e.g.
> scenario:
>
> 1. Web app consumer app --> sends request to WS broker (uses WSS4J to
> sign/encrypt)
> 2. WS Broker (a wrapper SOAP interface to underlying JMS/MOM) --> routes the
> message to the real Target web service
> 3. Target web service processes the request and sends reply back via the WS
> Broker.
>
> Given the above scenario, is there a way to avoid the WS Broker to verify
> sig/decrypt and then sign/encrypt (again) to route to target web service?
>
> In some scenarios, the WS Broker will need to decrypt the message (e.g. if
> it needs to transform/enrich the message) but in a lot of cases, we'll be
> using it to simply route the message to the target web service (e.g. it will
> do lookup to UDDI).  In this case it is simply acting as "middle-man".
>
> Is the above scenario outside the scope of WSS4J? If yes, is there a
> workaround and what are the WS-* specification(s) that recommend how to go
> about doing the above.
>
> Any help/advice will be much appreciated.
>
> Many thanks,
> Ash
>
>


--
Davanum Srinivas : http://wso2.com/blogs/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to