----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stephen McConnell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

> Not really. :-)

Hmmm ...

> In a distributed solution the container that is establishing a service
> is responsible
> for santiy checking.

Exactly, but on demand, when a component/service is requested. I think in a
distributed environment the container should start up with few - or none -
information about the services it should expose or consume. These will be
discovered in the right time, when one feels like requesting/exposing them.
It is totally different from what we have now, as Niclas already stated.

> But there is a piece missing - a protocol dealing
> with inter-
> container communityactions concerning service availablity.  For example,
> the client
> container would aquire a service from a remote container and probably
> register a
> listerner on the remote container.

Easy man! :-)
That is a possible strategy, but is not the one.

> If the remote is taking down the
> component that
> is providing the service, it can notify client containers.

On my head the Client/Server should not create any kind of link. The client
just can't rely on any notification of the server is taking down. In fact
the client doesnt know any server; if it needs a service, it shout and
obtain someone to help it. After a while, if it needs the same service
again, it should shout again.

> In this model the client component is totally unaware that the service
> it is provided with is remote.

If we can do that, it would be very very nice.... :-)


hammett



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to