The jndi-name is supposed to be the name to which the Home interface
is bound and the local-jndi-name is the name to which the LocalHome
interface is bound. An application should be able to look up a home
using the name at any time. Of course remote clients can not lookup
the LocalHome, but both should be available in global JNDI for
applications in the same Java VM.
I would have -1ed the removal of the global JNDI namespace if I had
realized that it was removed, and I feel strongly that we should put
it back in ASAP.
-dain
On Jan 16, 2006, at 10:53 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
All (and David Blevins in particular),
Currently we let you set both a jndi-name and local-jndi-name on an
EJB (and I assume each only works if the EJB has the corresponding
interface).
It's pretty clear that the jndi-name can be used by an application
client that wants to look up and invoke the EJB via its remote/home
interfaces.
I don't see how the local-jndi-name can be used. Since we removed the
"global JNDI space" on the server side, I think all JNDI access is
effectively remote, and therefore you couldn't talk to the EJB through
its local/local home interfaces. Is that right? Should the
local-jndi-name element be deprecated and/or removed?
Thanks,
Aaron
