incubator-stonehenge-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Avantika Agrawal (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Updated: (STONEHENGE-88) Use SEC value to remove unnecessary bindings in .NET
Date Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:16:14 GMT


Avantika Agrawal updated STONEHENGE-88:

    Attachment: Stonehenge-88-trial.patch

Here's a patch that I attempted, just to test if this was possible. (this is a standalone
patch - it duplicates changes from Stonehenge-88-I so don't apply other the other patch)

It seems to be working fine (there are only two endpoints in the config files specifying a
secure and a basic binding) and we are switching between them based on the SEC value in the

The only problem is with the secure messaging - each implementation has custom bindings for
the security so I get a SecurityNegotiationException. 

Any ideas on how to resolve this problem?

> Use SEC value to remove unnecessary bindings in .NET
> ----------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: STONEHENGE-88
>                 URL:
>             Project: Stonehenge
>          Issue Type: Wish
>            Reporter: Avantika Agrawal
>            Priority: Minor
>         Attachments: Stonehenge-88-I.patch, Stonehenge-88-trial.patch
> It would be nice to use the SEC value from the database with a single custom binding
(for all the different stacks), rather than have bindngs for each stack individually. This
would make the code easier to follow, as well. 
> There are several ways we could approach this problem:
> 1 - Have a basic and a sec binding in the App.config files and select between the two
of these uses the boolean SEC value specified in the SERVICE table. This means that the implementations
have to use only these bindings - no options
> 2 - Implementations can use whatever binding they want as long as its in the Config file.
This means that the SEC value will be a string and it will be used to select between the different
bindings. This allows for more than two bindings - there can be custom bindings for certain
stacks, but this may introduce the same complexity that we currently have.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

View raw message