Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.
Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.
Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
I’m trying to implement integration using JMS as a transport and SOAP WebServices being interfaces for my applications to be integrated.
WSDL itself defines transport as JMS?HTTP and move the configuration of the JMS queues elsewhere? I’m considering Apache Camel as an alternative.
The JMS parts in the WSDL are only hints how to invoke the service. There might be somewhat tricky without the hints if you rely on some import tool generating skeleton code, without the hints though.
I have even used WSDLs with both HTTP and JMS transports defined in them, so that is also possible.
How you configure your queues is another matter, because it depends on which framework you use.
I can’t see how Apache Camel should be an alternative to SOAP over JMS. Camel is an integration engine (actually able to do SOAP over JMS) but not a transport standard itself. As a small sidenote, I really recommend Camel to do integration tasks.
You might want to carefully think about your requirements for your integration needs. SOAP over JMS can be quite powerful, but also a bit complex to design with, since people tend to think about SOAP as a synchronous service definition and JMS is designed mostly for asynchronous communication, even though there is somewhat support for synchronous calls as well.