| Author |
Message
|
| murdeep |
 Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 8:59 am Post subject: SOAP Request throwing BIP3701 error |
 |
|
Master
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 211
|
Hello, IIB V9001. I have a SOAP request that fails on the response. The failure is logged as a BIP3701 event:
| Quote: |
( BKRT01.EG12 ) A Java exception was thrown whilst calling the Java JNI method ''Axis2Requester_processResponseMessageSync''. The Java exception was ''org.apache.axis2.AxisFault: MustUnderstand Header-Check Failed for Header: {http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing}Action whilst processing operation: CloseCase''. The Java stack trace was ''Frame : 0 org.apache.axis2.AxisFault: MustUnderstand Header-Check Failed for Header: {http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing}Action whilst processing operation: CloseCase
@: com.ibm.broker.axis2.MustUnderstandHeaderInHandler.invoke(MustUnderstandHeaderInHandler.java:340)
@: org.apache.axis2.handlers.AbstractHandler.invoke_stage2(AbstractHandler.java:133)
@: org.apache.axis2.engine.Phase.invokeHandler(Phase.java:343)
@: org.apache.axis2.engine.Phase.invoke(Phase.java:313)
@: org.apache.axis2.engine.AxisEngine.invoke(AxisEngine.java:360)
@: org.apache.axis2.engine.AxisEngine.receive(AxisEngine.java:195)
@: com.ibm.broker.axis2.Axis2Requester.processResponseMessageInternal(Axis2Requester.java:2469)
@: com.ibm.broker.axis2.Axis2Requester.processResponseMessageSync(Axis2Requester.java:2243)
''.
Correct the error, and if necessary redeploy the flow. |
Using soapUI the response is validated OK.
Here is the HTTP Reply Header:
| Quote: |
HTTP/1.1 500 Internal Server Error
Content-Length: 562
Content-Type: application/soap+xml; charset=utf-8
Server: Microsoft-IIS/7.5
X-Powered-By: ASP.NET
X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 00:21:32 GMT |
The HTTP Reply Message Body bitstream (if any) received from the server was:
| Quote: |
<s:Envelope xmlns:s="http://www.w3.org/2003/05/soap-envelope" xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing">
<s:Header>
<a:Action s:mustUnderstand="1">http://www.w3.org/2005/08/addressing/soap/fault</a:Action>
</s:Header>
<s:Body>
<s:Fault>
<s:Code>
<s:Value>s:Sender</s:Value>
<s:Subcode><s:Value xmlns:a="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/ws/2005/02/sc">a:BadContextToken</s:Value></s:Subcode>
</s:Code>
<s:Reason>
<s:Text xml:lang="en-US">The security context token is expired or is not valid. The message was not processed.</s:Text>
</s:Reason>
</s:Fault>
</s:Body>
</s:Envelope> |
I can't see anything that is wrong with the response so I am not sure why IIB is throwing the exception
Any suggestions would be appreciated.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 9:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
Has to do with security... 
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 9:13 am Post subject: Re: SOAP Request throwing BIP3701 error |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| murdeep wrote: |
| I can't see anything that is wrong with the response so I am not sure why IIB is throwing the exception |
Because IIB enforces WS rules and SoapUI really doesn't care that much.
| murdeep wrote: |
| Any suggestions would be appreciated.
|
Fix the security issue.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| murdeep |
| Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 9:29 am Post subject: Re: SOAP Request throwing BIP3701 error |
|
|
Master
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 211
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| murdeep wrote: |
| I can't see anything that is wrong with the response so I am not sure why IIB is throwing the exception |
Because IIB enforces WS rules and SoapUI really doesn't care that much.
| murdeep wrote: |
| Any suggestions would be appreciated.
|
Fix the security issue. |
I am deliberately sending in a request with no WSSE-Security header to force the fault.
I think the issue here is not with my request but how IIB handles the fault response that I get back. I am expecting to go down the Fault terminal and get the "The security context token is expired or is not valid. The message was not processed" in a fault. But instead I am going down the Failure terminal because IIB is throwing the JNI error.
So my question still remains what is wrong with the response the SOAP service returns that is causing IIB to throw the JNI exception? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| fjb_saper |
| Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 9:38 am Post subject: Re: SOAP Request throwing BIP3701 error |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 18 Nov 2003
Posts: 20756
Location: LI,NY
|
| murdeep wrote: |
I am deliberately sending in a request with no WSSE-Security header to force the fault.
I think the issue here is not with my request but how IIB handles the fault response that I get back. I am expecting to go down the Fault terminal and get the "The security context token is expired or is not valid. The message was not processed" in a fault. But instead I am going down the Failure terminal because IIB is throwing the JNI error.
So my question still remains what is wrong with the response the SOAP service returns that is causing IIB to throw the JNI exception? |
As a wild guess, have you checked that all the namespaces for the Fault response and its content are correct?
_________________
MQ & Broker admin |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| murdeep |
| Posted: Thu Feb 18, 2016 11:18 am Post subject: Re: SOAP Request throwing BIP3701 error |
|
|
Master
Joined: 03 Nov 2004
Posts: 211
|
| fjb_saper wrote: |
| As a wild guess, have you checked that all the namespaces for the Fault response and its content are correct? |
Well as far as I can see it looks ok. The body definitely looks ok but I am not sure about the header which is what IIB is complaining about. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vakku |
| Posted: Mon Oct 02, 2017 10:53 pm Post subject: Re: SOAP Request throwing BIP3701 error |
|
|
Novice
Joined: 13 Oct 2008
Posts: 20
Location: California
|
| murdeep wrote: |
| fjb_saper wrote: |
| As a wild guess, have you checked that all the namespaces for the Fault response and its content are correct? |
Well as far as I can see it looks ok. The body definitely looks ok but I am not sure about the header which is what IIB is complaining about. |
Hi Murdeep, Did you get into the bottom of this issue?
I'm also getting into the same problem when the SOAP request parses the response coming back from an external system. If you had a resoltion to thi, please post and it will be very helpful. Thank you in advance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| joebuckeye |
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 5:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Posts: 365
Location: Columbus, OH
|
We saw this issue when the SOAP endpoint was returning SOAP Fault messages with an HTTP status of 200. SOAP Fault messages need to have a 500 HTTP status.
The provider refused to change this behavior so we were forced to use HTTP nodes in place of SOAP nodes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 5:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| joebuckeye wrote: |
| We saw this issue when the SOAP endpoint was returning SOAP Fault messages with an HTTP status of 200. |
Ah - the old "we're successfully returning a fault" ploy. Been there ourselves.
| joebuckeye wrote: |
| The provider refused to change this behavior so we were forced to use HTTP nodes in place of SOAP nodes. |
So did we. Until we threatened to change providers. Then (by a thousand to one coincidence) they found a way to fix it. Lucky timing really.....
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| joebuckeye |
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 7:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Partisan
Joined: 24 Aug 2007
Posts: 365
Location: Columbus, OH
|
| Vitor wrote: |
| joebuckeye wrote: |
| The provider refused to change this behavior so we were forced to use HTTP nodes in place of SOAP nodes. |
So did we. Until we threatened to change providers. Then (by a thousand to one coincidence) they found a way to fix it. Lucky timing really..... |
I should say our business people refused to reach out to the provider to tell them of their mistake. Most of the time it seems our business people favor the outside vendors more than their own in-house IT staff and assume we are the ones who don't know what we are doing. Probably because we tell them the truth while the outside vendor is selling them unicorns and rainbows. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Vitor |
| Posted: Tue Oct 03, 2017 8:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
Grand High Poobah
Joined: 11 Nov 2005
Posts: 26093
Location: Texas, USA
|
| joebuckeye wrote: |
| Most of the time it seems our business people favor the outside vendors more than their own in-house IT staff and assume we are the ones who don't know what we are doing. |
Because vendors are being paid and therefore have a moral obligation to tell the truth 
| joebuckeye wrote: |
| Probably because we tell them the truth while the outside vendor is selling them unicorns and rainbows. |
I shoot unicorns for their horns (ground unicorn horn is a remedy for stupidity), and the black cloud over my head makes rainbows impossible.
_________________
Honesty is the best policy.
Insanity is the best defence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
