Bug 778426
Summary: | EBWS One way MEP does not conform to standard | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [JBoss] JBoss Enterprise SOA Platform 5 | Reporter: | Jiri Pechanec <jpechane> |
Component: | JBossESB | Assignee: | Mark Little <mark.little> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | |
Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | high | ||
Version: | 5.0 | CC: | dlesage |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | 5.0.0 GA | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
URL: | http://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/SOA-908 | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | SOA-908 | Environment: | |
Last Closed: | 2010-02-12 10:16:50 UTC | Type: | Bug |
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Jiri Pechanec
2008-10-02 10:27:27 UTC
Link: Added: This issue depends JBESB-2089 JBossWS does not correctly support the Provider API and, as such, we needed this as a workaround. From our code. // We should be able to return null here but this causes JBossWS to NPE. return javax.xml.soap.MessageFactory.newInstance().createMessage(); Verified in CR1 Please review the following draft text that has been added to the Resolved Issues section of the Release Notes: https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBESB-2089 The one-way service for EBWS was incorrectly returning an HTTP response that contained a SOAP envelope. This was undertaken as a workaround for another issue but, as a consequence, it violated the WS-I Basic Profile R2714. To resolve this issue, a Servlet Filter has been added to the WS Servlet. As a result, the response is now filtered out so that null is returned. This issue is not listed in the 5.0 rel notes: http://documentation-stage.bne.redhat.com/docs/en-US/JBoss_Enterprise_SOA_Platform/5.0.0/html-single/Release_Notes/ G'day Len, We did not document this as it was a resolved issue, so not applicable to a GA release. Darrin and I have just been discussing it though and we feel it is probably worthwhile putting these into the Migration Issues section in the future as the way it works has been changed between the two releases. We will adopt this as a practice in the future. Cheers. |