No details as yet. I'm just directing the jmx on the client discussion towards a
generalization of the notions of the server jmx microkernel.

JavaGroups does not assume a multicast enabled network. Look at its
architecture and you will see that protocols is abstracted away from
messaging such that groups can run on top of point-point links.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Scott Stark
Chief Technology Officer
JBoss Group, LLC
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "James Higginbotham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, November 09, 2002 12:00 PM
Subject: RE: [JBoss-dev] JMX on the client side?


Scott,

Interesting.. Do you have this scoped in your mind yet? I mean, Jboss (I
hate how outlook "fixes" the b in jboss) currently uses JavaGroups,
which assumes a multicast-enabled network. When you get to true
peer-to-peer, you may have a double firewall situation where multicast
doesn't work outside your LAN. In which case, you need concepts of
superpeers on your local network that all register with public directory
services to create a web of superpeers bridging private networks. This
is (sortof) what JXTA does best (cough). In the past, I've seen
discussions of JXTA + Jboss but haven't seen many thoughtful proposals,
just "it would be cool ifs". Am I taking this vision of yours too far,
not far enough, or missing you completely? The architecture of your
dynamic proxies and JavaGroup networking seems to work great for local
networks, so you must be envisioning more?

James




-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek
Welcome to geek heaven.
http://thinkgeek.com/sf
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development

Reply via email to