Your choice of words is a confirmation on your character. Once again, can
this discussion list stick to EJB topics, not vendor bashing?
thanks,
Jason
-----Original Message-----
From: A mailing list for Enterprise JavaBeans development
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Louth, William (Exchange)
Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2000 1:58 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Does IIOP Matter !!! READ THIS !!!!!!!!!!!
Jason,
Please put your money where your mouth is and send me 50,000 dollars and
then maybe I will stop, anything to help your company. I will galdly forward
you my bank details. By the way did you know that the webster dictionary has
2 interesting entries regarding your companies name:
2. The stick or wand with which persons were formerly admitted tenants, they
holding it in the hand, and swearing fealty to the lord. Such tenants were
called tenants by the verge.
10. Penis.
kind regards
William
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jason A. Westra [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Friday, March 10, 2000 2:47 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Does IIOP Matter !!! READ THIS !!!!!!!!!!!
>
> William,
>
> Someone must be paying you to slam EJB vendors other than IAS and babble
> incessantly about IAS features. If so, what is the price? I will pay
> more
> for you to stop...
>
> Jason
>
>
> Jason A. Westra
> Chief Technology Officer
> Verge Technologies Group, Inc.
> www.vergecorp.com
>
> Verge News:
> http://industry.java.sun.com/javanews/stories/story2/0,1072,23299,00.html
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: A mailing list for Enterprise JavaBeans development
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Louth, William (Exchange)
> Sent: Thursday, March 09, 2000 9:36 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Does IIOP Matter !!! READ THIS !!!!!!!!!!!
>
>
> Hi all,
>
> I have extracted the following posting from the Inprise Appserver Newgroup
> (I hope this is OK jkw). I think everbody who is considering buying a
> server
> or throwing out their current one read this. I know this might cause alot
> of
> heated discussions but I think it is time we got to the truth about this
> interop thing. I have had enough of the wild claims, somethings verging on
> outright lies by ejb server vendors. I think it is hard enough building
> distributed systems without these kind of issues not being resolved. My
> reading of the spec was that ejb would provide us both portable beans and
> interoperability between beans residing in different containers. Can some
> inform me that this is not the case because of some vendors not updating
> their architectures or because of my reading being incorrect.
> ==========================================================================
> ==
> =================
> Why IIOP matters
> Eyal,
> Consider a deployment including the following:
> a) WebLogic Server 5.0
> b) IAS4 (or any other server supporting full IIOP)
> c) Client program
> Let's say that the client (c) wants to access EJBs in both servers (a) and
> (b).If you use WebLogic's proprietary RMI protocol (T3), then your client
> (c) can only access (a), not (b), since our product does not support the
> T3
> protocol. If you use WebLogic's client-side IIOP protocol, then your
> client(c) can access (a) or (b). However, if (c) starts a transaction,
> this
> transaction will not be propagated to (a), but will be to (b), since
> WebLogic does not provide full JTS support, meaning IIOP based transaction
> propagation, as per: <http://java.sun.com/products/jts/index.html>
> Furthermore, since WebLogic only provides client-side IIOP support, beans
> deployed in (a) cannot communicate withbeans deployed in (b), and vice
> versa. All of these interoperability limitations go away ifyou use two
> products which provide full support for IIOP.This means using IIOP not
> only
> for client-to-server interoperability (which WebLogic supports,
> partially),
> but also for server-to-server interoperability (which WebLogic does not
> support at all). With full IIOP based products, (c) can call (a) and (b),
> either within the scope of a transaction or not.
> I find it curious that the EJB specification recommends using IIOP in
> exactly the opposite way. The spec. recommends using IIOP for intra-server
> interoperability, since this is where you need to get different vendors to
> agree how to communicate, and a standard protocol is very much needed. For
> the case of client to server communication, the EJB spec does not
> currently
> recommend a particular protocol, since you can always use the particular
> vendor's client-stubs to get the the objects. With WebLogic, they support
> IIOP only for clients. Curious...
> -jkw
> ==========================================================================
> ==
> ===
> Eyal,
> To the best of my knowledge, the following application servers provide
> full
> support for IIOP:
> GemStone, IAS4, Oracle, Persistence, etc.
> The following provide only client support for IIOP:
> WebLogic Server 5.0 (still in Beta), iPlanet (not yet in Beta)
> The following do not support IIOP at all:
> WebLogic Server 4.5.1 (current WebLogic release)So to answer your
> question:
> Users of WLS 4.5.1 are completely isolated, in terms of interoperability.
> Users of WLS 5.0 or iPlanet can only use (non-transactional) IIOP clients,
> but have no interoperability among different servers.Users of: GemStone,
> IAS4, Oracle, Persistence, etc. can do whatever they want, in terms of
> interoperability. Sorry for the "etc.", but I believe there are quite a
> few
> other vendors who are building EJB solutions using full IIOP. I just
> don't
> know the whole list.
> -jkw
>
>
>
> ***********************************************************************
> Bear Stearns is not responsible for any recommendation, solicitation,
> offer or agreement or any information about any transaction, customer
> account or account activity contained in this communication.
> ***********************************************************************
>
> ==========================================================================
> =
> To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the
> body
> of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help". <<
> File: Jason A. Westra.vcf >>
***********************************************************************
Bear Stearns is not responsible for any recommendation, solicitation,
offer or agreement or any information about any transaction, customer
account or account activity contained in this communication.
***********************************************************************
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
