Thanks Rob, it helps a bunch. Now the only thing I need to try this out is to figure out a not-too-ugly hack to expose the Proton part of Qpid JMS. :)
On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 at 10:16 Rob Godfrey <[email protected]> wrote: > The work around AMQP management spec is still ongoing and subject to > change, but is a request reply message exchange protocol layered on top of > AMQP, so you can use any AMQP library, such a Proton client can be used to > perform AMQP Management. A public draft of the Management Draft can be > found here > > https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=55429&wg_abbrev=amqp > . We'll be working hard to progress this spec this year, and I'll post > updates to this list. The spec won't describe particular controls/commands > just the mechanisms for using them - so you would need to have > documentation from Microsoft on the names of the commands/attributes for > their specific functionality. > > Hope this helps, > Rob > > On 24 January 2017 at 09:51, Michael Lam <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi Rob, thanks for the prompt reply! > > > > Last question - does the Proton library support AMQP Management protocol > at > > any level? If it does, perhaps I could work around it by dropping down > to > > AMQP level until official JMS 2.0 support arrives. > > > > Thanks! > > > > On Tue, 24 Jan 2017 at 09:38 Rob Godfrey <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > > Hi Michael, > > > > > > the DELAYED_DELIVERY feature will be specified in the upcoming AMQP-JMS > > > binding which will be a separate document from the core protocol. I am > > not > > > sure whether/when Microsoft will be supporting that in Service Bus. > All > > > AMQP 1.0 implementations looking to support JMS 2.0 would be expected > to > > > support this feature. > > > > > > AMQP Management is another extension being worked on within the AMQP > > > standards community. It will provide a mechanism for brokers/services > to > > > provide mechanisms to control or manage the broker. I am unfamiliar > with > > > the particular controls that Microsoft that expose through AMQP > > Management > > > in their service. > > > > > > Hope this helps, > > > Rob > > > > > > On 24 January 2017 at 09:30, Michael Lam <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hello, thanks for the new release, am very excited to be able to use > > JMS > > > > 2.0 with QPID! > > > > > > > > While trying to use 0.20 with Azure Service Bus (through AMQP 1.0), I > > run > > > > into the issue of the library complaining "feature not supported", > > when I > > > > set a delivery delay to a MessageProducer. > > > > > > > > Upon inspecting the source code, QPID seems to recognise the > capability > > > > flag "DELAYED_DELIVERY" from the connection's properties. Does it > mean > > > the > > > > broker implementation has to advertise DELAYED_DELIVERY verbatim for > it > > > to > > > > work? Looking through the AMQP 1.0 specs no mention of > > DELAYED_DELIVERY > > > > was found. > > > > > > > > On Azure it says it "supports AMQP 1.0 scheduled message", which I > > > believe > > > > might be similar, however, it says it uses the "Management Version > 1.0 > > > > working draft": > > > > https://docs.microsoft.com/en-gb/azure/service-bus- > > > > messaging/service-bus-amqp-request-response > > > > > > > > I suspect there probably is a major misunderstanding on my part on > how > > > AMQP > > > > 1.0 specify features. My current impression is that AMQP itself does > > not > > > > define scheduled or delayed delivery, but it is up to implementations > > to > > > > define it at a level higher than AMQP. > > > > > > > > Can anyone shed some light? > > > > > > > > Thanks! > > > > > > > > > >
