OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

cmis message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: RE: [cmis] Looking for additional information around CMIS conformant authentication



You’re welcome to check out my posts about accessing CMIS from WCF, which include source code: http://craigrandall.net/archives/2009/01/consuming-cmis-wsdl-in-visual-studio/.


At the tail end of this post, I state “implicit SOAP headers in a contract require extra coding on the part of a consumer.


Anyway, download my sample and read its README file and the code. It explains, I believe, the very condition you’ve encountered.





From: Jens Hübel [mailto:jhuebel@opentext.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2009 12:47 AM
To: cmis@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [cmis] Looking for additional information around CMIS conformant authentication


Hi all,


we are currently investigating how to add support WS-Security 1.1 to our CMIS implementation. To test interoperability Java-.Net we are trying to build a sample (Hello World like) client to authenticate against server. It seems that in the WCF configuration in .Net you can set a whole bunch of various options and parameters in the behaviors and bindings sections. Currently we are facing the problem that the .Net client always generates some information that the server does not understand (causing exceptions etc.). Well this problem is just our implementation issue and probably the spec in this regard is accurate and precise enough. However I wonder if  we could make life easier (having the PlugFest in mind) from a practical perspective if:

a)      someone has already tested this and could provide a sample configuration file that works at least in one repository

b)      we should agree to support at least one common configuration (again not as part of the spec but just for practical reasons at the plugfest) for .Net and Java

c)       we have a common place to share such things that are not directly spec related but are just tools, guidelines, best practices that make life easier for all us


I remember that multiple vendors ran into the authentication issue the last time. I assume that MTOM would be another candidate for such kind of additional information. So perhaps we can make some preparations to be as good as possible prepared for the next tests. Comments if you see any value in this would be welcome.


Thanks Jens


P.S. I am not 100% sure if this mailing list is the right place to ask questions like this. If there is any better place for questions not directly related to the work on the spec please let me know.

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]