"thomas.diesler(a)jboss.com" wrote : How about making a copy of the handler chain on port creation and scope that copy on the port? Do you mean making a copy of the handler chain or of the handler chain metadata? Well, the port actually already has its own handler chain which is stored in its binding. If the handler chain copy is meant to prevent a port from having its own handlers changed by somebody else, we could also think about not registering the client for notifications when the metadata changes (cfr the observer/observable in place there) and manually ask for binding handler chain rebuild when the config-name/file is set through a given port. Could this be reasonable (I'm not completely aware of the reason that led to the observer/observable pattern being used)? The service will still be touched by an action on the port, anyway (IOW this does not solve the problem completely). View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4154163#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...