I think the brokerName in the network configuration is useful when there is more than one bridge configured on a broker. It allows the two networkConnectors to be differentiated. When a single network connector is configured, the default "localhost" value (so leaving it out) will suffice.
w.r.t naming your brokers, there are no real issues that I can think of and hence no hard recommendations. If all spoke brokers share the same name it may just be more difficult to parse/make sense of the logs With hub and spoke and duplex networkConnectors, the auto created (duplex) network connector will pick up its broker name from the remote peer. 2009/10/23 Fred Moore <[email protected]> > Hi Rob, > > many thanks for the very prompt and comprehensive answer, which encourages > me to venture into a second round of questions :-) ... > > > Hi Folks, > > 1\ Can someone shed some light on the actual role of the brokerName in a > network of brokers scenario? (by reading the docs it looks like it does not > play much of a role) > > 2\ Are there recommendations/best practices for naming brokers in a network > (where some nodes may host more than one broker)? > > 3\ Can we have a hub&spoke topology where all spokes have the same > brokerName? (which would remove the naming headache completely) > > Thanks in advance. > Cheers, > F. > -- http://blog.garytully.com Open Source Integration http://fusesource.com
