IPF is based on Apache Camel. For an overview of Camel's rich feature set (which can be fully used in IPF applications) refer to the project's integration patterns and integration components pages.
With IPF you define integration routes with the Groovy programming language. It is more than a mere usage of Camel's domain-specific language (internal DSL or fluent API) inside Groovy: Camel's native DSL has been extended to support e.g. the usage of closures (for inline definitions of message processors, routing rules ...) and also provides a DSL extension mechanism to define custom extensions to the Camel DSL.
The DSL extension mechanism is a Groovy meta-programming-based mechanism for defining new DSL elements to be used in integration routes. This is especially useful if you want to provide custom language elements for re-occurring message processing patterns or if you want to design a project-specific message processing DSL (e.g. one that is related to the HL7 domain).
These are domain-neutral message processors and DSL extensions usable for general-purpose message processing. The core features also enhance existing Camel DSL elements for usage with Groovy-specific language elements such as closures. For XML message processing there is special Groovy XML support.
A set of components for creating actor interfaces as specified in IHE profiles. This release provides components for XDS.a, XDS.b and the audit-part of ATNA.
A domain-specific language for building CDA documents. This DSL supports the creation of structurally correct CDA documents by enforcing CDA-relevant schema definitions but without dealing with low-level XML details.
Enables the deployment of IPF components (bundles) to OSGi platforms. IPF service bundles register platform services at the OSGi service registry for consumption by IPF applications. Extender bundles control the activation of DSL extensions inside an OSGi environment. A reference implementation of IPF on top of Eclipse Equinox is available as IPF runtime.
An infrastructure for unified publishing of system-events and application-events. Subscriber components can be configured to translate application events to e.g. Atom/RSS feeds or log files to mention a few.
DSL and tools to determine the performance characteristics of IPF applications. These allow for measuring the processing time of messages for routes or route parts as well as the message throughput. Performance measurement results can be viewed with a web browser.
An infrastructure for including platform-independent message processing libraries into platform-specific message processing routes. An alternative is Camel's bean integration mechanism.
Maven archetypes for most commonly used IPF project types, ranging from simple embedded integration solutions to cluster configurations supporting high-availability scenarios. Usage examples of IPF features are provided as well.
From version 1.7 onwards flow management aspects are weaved at runtime instead of compile time. If you're using multcasts and splitters in your routes you should read the this addition to the flow management documentation.
For transporting HL7 messages over MLLP you should use the camel-hl7 component. Although the current Camel version used by IPF is 1.6.0 it is required to use camel-hl7 version 1.6.1 if you want to transport HL7 messages larger than 1k. See also this post.
The validate DSL was changed to throw an exception (type is validator implementation-specific) instead of returning a fault message. Routes should handle this exception directly instead of a fault message.
Known issues
IPF 1.7-m1 uses Spring 2.5.6 (included via Camel 1.6.0). This version has a major bug in the spring-jms component that affects routes that use the Camel JMS component. This bug may cause IPF applications to hang in shutdown phases. So far, we didn't observe any issues during normal operations of JMS-based routes.
Further notes
Javadocs for Groovy sources have been generated from Java 'stubs' which have been derived from the Groovy sources via the gmaven-plugin.
Source cross-references also include Java 'stubs' which have been derived from the Groovy sources. These sources do not represent the logic implemented in the Groovy source files.
Source jars deployed to the Open eHealth Maven repository also include Java 'stubs' which have been derived from the Groovy sources. These sources do not represent the logic implemented in the Groovy source files.