Jiandong Guo wrote:
> I believe RM also create a new Packet for RM protocol messages. So this
> should also be a problem for them.
>
OK.
In your opinion should we propagate this property?
I do not think it should cause any harm but but things need to be
documented.
Or perhaps we should have a configuration option for propagation?
Paul.
> Thanks!
>
> Jiandong
>
> Paul Sandoz wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> As i understand it the secure conversation pipe creates a new Packet
>> for its pipe line from the Packet of the client request. Are there any
>> other cases where this occurs?
>>
>> In the general case, should we propagate the content negotiation
>> property? i.e.
>>
>> private Packet(Packet that) {
>> that.copySatelliteInto(this);
>> this.invocationProperties = that.invocationProperties;
>> this.handlerScopePropertyNames = that.handlerScopePropertyNames;
>> this.contentNegotiation = that.contentNegotiation;
>> // copy other properties that need to be copied. is there any?
>> }
>>
>> So in the case of secure conversation if the client enabled Fast
>> Infoset then that would also get propagated to the secure
>> conversation client.
>>
>> Given that the 'pessimistic' property will only result in FI being
>> enabled iff the service is FI-enabled the propagation of this property
>> will not affect the interoperablity with non-FI-enabled secure
>> conversation services.
>>
>> Paul.
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe_at_jax-ws.dev.java.net
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help_at_jax-ws.dev.java.net
>
--
| ? + ? = To question
----------------\
Paul Sandoz
x38109
+33-4-76188109