> > Rather, I feel that we want to enhance our primitive JMX support, and have > > administration tools use that interface. > >
JMX is, I think, the standard way to expose management functionality (Java Management Extensions) so you are right, this is clearly the best way to integrate a web management console. > I've looked at the JMX support before and there was one show-stopping issue: > no security on the JMX invocations. We need to make sure that at least only > "root" can access the JMX services. RMI for JMX has no visible security that i could find. The JMX HTTP adapter has basic authentication and SSL. MX4J also has a SOAP Connector/ConnectorServer combo. If a servlet container was included in James we could expose all functionality as web services via SOAP with basic authentication. This would allow for easy communication between the web admin console and James and also allow advanced functionality such as autodiscovery mechnisms between multiple instances of James servers on the same network. -- Juan Carlos Murillo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
