From: ecf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ecf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Scott Lewis
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 5:09 PM
To: Eclipse Communication Framework (ECF) developer mailing list.
Subject: Re: [ecf-dev] handling pub-sub providers with RFC 119
Konradi, Philipp wrote:
Agreed, option 1 doesn't support the intended usage of RFC119
[Konradi, Philipp] I'd prefer option two, since option one doesn't
support the transparency which RFC 119 targeted for OSGi application
(transparent remoting)...but in fact as I understand it RFC 119 in
current form doesn't actually support this model (pub/sub) of
remoting/remote services (because there is only the notion of
'endpoint'...and no notion of pubsub group).
So we (ECF) will/are introducing the API described below to make it
possible to use RFC 119 publication and proxy creation within pubsub
groups (e.g. JMS). It is, of course, also possible for people to use
the ECF remote services API to explicitly access proxies and the other
forms of remote communication on IRemoteService as well.
BTW: in :
To verify I've understood it correctly: 'server' is in case of JMS
Consider the following architecture:
A <--> B <--> C
In this architecture, we have two clients 'A' and 'C' and a server
'B'...all participating in the same publish and subscribe group.
Sort of :). In ECF's JMS provider implementation (with TCP anyway)
situation looks like this:
A <--> (JMS Broker) <--> C
The JMS Broker can be (and usually will be) run on the same
as B (the ECF 'group manager'). But this isn't required,
the JMS Broker and B can/could be run on a process separate from B.
might ask...why have B at all? Well, the answer is that B manages the
group membership for the entire group, so that reliable group
changes can be communicated to the others (A and C). It also can/does
manage any authentication that occurs for access to the group.
...By 'these cases'
mean publish and subscribe groups that are used for remote services
between members of those groups (e.g. JMS groups, etc).
Currently, there's no direct support in RFC119 for remote services
within pubsub groups... because although RFC119 has the notion of
'endpoint ID', this endpoint ID gives the location of the remote
service's host...which assumes that the host is a server (i.e. can
reached *directly* from a client), rather than indirectly (i.e. via
[Konradi, Philipp] That's correct, RFC 119 really does not say a
about pub-sub... though my thinking was always that pub-sub is
possible with RFC 119 as well. But let's see, this discussion soundsPROP_KEY_ENDPOINT_ID
I assume by saying 'endpoint ID' you mean RFC 119
ServicePublication defines also a property called
but this is just some unique service endpoint ID (e.g. an UUID)allowing
to find out whether service metadata discovered via differentdiscovery
providers belongs to the same service instance or not.that
My interpretation of RFC 119 PROP_KEY_ENDPOINT_LOCATION property is
it's the URL under which the advertised service endpoint can bereached.
Right this is my understanding.
So in case of an Web service endpoint the url would probably contain
local host and port, in case of JMS (indirect communication) the url
would contain the host name of the JMS broker, port and the queue or
Perhaps, but this isn't necessary the endpoint for all clients
participating in the group. That is, what if A (above) publishes a
service? What would its endpoint be in the service publication?
BTW: Would it make sense to add some (configuration) mechanisms toshould
select whether JMS queues or topics (request-response or pub-sub)
Effectively, ECF already now already has this with the
be used for exposure of a service?
I could think of using either intents for this or/and additional
configuration data with the service.
IHostContainerFinder. It would allow the usage of intents (or any
service properties) to determine how/what container (and what it's
configuration might be) is made available for usage as the
provider ...and for JMS can/could determine what JMS queues/topics are
used to expose the service (e.g. by creating JMS IContainer instances
A custom IHostContainerFinder can replaced/substituted by creating an
implementation of IHostContainerFinder and registering it as a service
(whiteboard pattern) via the service registry with a service.ranking
that is higher than the default one (which is Integer.MIN_VALUE).
ecf-dev mailing list
ecf-dev mailing list