> How about you also put those ideas somewhere on the wiki at: > http://stomp.codehaus.org/ > Done. Here's a page for this kind of material
http://stomp.codehaus.org/Stomp+v1.1+Ideas > Some of the things I see missing in STOMP are: > - Optional Keep Alive protocol. Right now we have to depend on the OS > to detect socket failure to time out a dead client. Would be nice if > the client could optionally agree to send a Keep Alive commands when > the connection is idle. That way the sever can detect dead clients > quicker. > I'd definitely keep this optional, since most Stomp clients implement just basic blocked reading of the socket (waiting for the next frame). > - Perhaps standardize a 'host' header in the CONNECT frame to specify > the host name that the client is connecting to. This would allow > implementing virtual hosting where multiple DNS host entries point at > the same STOMP server. > This would rock. I wonder how we could support virtual hosting in ActiveMQ ... Should it be done, by allocating a different path hierarchy for each host, so for example /queue/A on host1 would physically be queue://host1/A, etc? Cheers -- Dejan Bosanac http://www.ttmsolutions.com - get a free ActiveMQ user guide ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/ Scripting in Java - http://www.scriptinginjava.net
