On Aug 11, 2006, at 2:25 PM, Jim Marino wrote:
On Aug 11, 2006, at 1:59 PM, Jeremy Boynes wrote:
On Aug 11, 2006, at 1:49 PM, Jim Marino wrote:
On Aug 10, 2006, at 10:53 PM, Venkata Krishnan wrote:
My imagination of the Registry is that it is lightweight and it
should be ok
to host several instances of it on a host, ofcourse each on a
different
port. Hence we might actually allow the assemblies to mention
which port
number is preferred to host the RMI Service.
I think this could be accomplished with one system service. The
RMIHost API could have overloaded versions of register(), one
that takes an explicit port and one that uses a default. If an
explicit port is passed, the RMIHost would look for a cached
Registry, creating one if needed.
I think one component per registry would be easier to manage.
Each registry would register with the RMIHost by socket address;
service instances would register with the RMIHost which would
delegate to the appropriate registry based on the endpoint address.
Specifying just port number in the assembly is not enough - you
need to be able to specify host/port combinations.
Forgot about the host. If we want to have one component per
registry, what happens when two services register at the same host/
port combination?
If two registries register, the second should fail (as it won't be
able to get the socket anyway).
Services will have a uri whose path will distinguish them.
--
Jeremy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
