Rickard �berg wrote:
> > Ian McCallion wrote:
> >
> > This is a VERY good idea!
> >
> > I would like to cast a vote in favour of a Java/XML standard for invoking
> > EJBs via XML, so that all EJB containers/servers would provide the
capability in
> > a compatible way. I would envisage that security, transaction and session
> > context information would all be encoded in the XML so that the XML request
is
> > truely transport-independent.
>
> Wouldn't this be Yet Another IIOP, only with much worse performance (due
> to the verbosity of XML)?
>
> What's the gain over IIOP?
>From a server perspective, yes it probably increases pathlength somewhat, BUT...
>From the client perspective the work needed to call a series of methods on a
series of objects is less - only one JNDI call and only one home to talk to.
>From a network perspective there are fewer requests flowing (could be a lot
fewer if a single gateway request contained multiple object requests)
>From an overall solution design perspective it:
1. It allows some interface matching, eg from version 1 to version 2
of an interface.
2. It allows server-side components to be invoked via other protocols,
eg store-and forward protocols such as MQSeries, JMS or email, or
HTTP from an XML-enabled web browser.
3. It is a more open and visible format than a marshalled parameter
list with object references, security context and transaction
context - great for trouble-shooting complex systems at 3am.
4. The clients can be independent of whether the server component is
implemented as an EJB or a CICS COBOL program or anything else.
Ian McCallion
CICS Business Unit
IBM Hursley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tel: ++44-1962-818065
Fax: ++44-1962-818069
===========================================================================
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".
