Inline:
On 09/26/2011 09:38 AM, Kabir Khan wrote:
From chat discussions I am doing the following for servers, in the
order below:
1) Using 2 separate endpoints for our current configuration, i.e.
<management>
<management-interfaces>
<native-interface interface="management" port="9999"
/>
</management-interfaces>
</management>
gives a 'management' endpoint. If there a remoting subsystem exists, that results
in a 'subsystem' endpoint.
Endpoints should have names which are as unique as possible. Perhaps
"${jboss.node.name}:management" for the management endpoint is a better
option, or make it configurable.
2) Ability to choose the subsystem endpoint for management.
Something along the lines of this for a domain mode server which needs an endpoint to
connect back to the HC:
<server-group>
<subsystem-management-endpoint/>
</server-group>
This will cause it to use the remoting subsystem endpoint, absense of this will create
the management endpoint.
This is a possible solution though like I said the endpoint name is
significant. Also one hopes that the user would be given the option to
register management with more than one endpoint?
For a standalone server:
<management>
<management-interfaces>
<native-remoting connector="some-remoting-connector" />
</management-interfaces>
</management>
This will not open the management endpoint but use the subsystem one instead. This needs
a little bit more thinking to install the correct channel open listener into the
connector
3) Better configuration of connectors and channel open listeners in the remoting
subsystem
4) Meet with Darran later this week to understand the security stuff a bit better
Normally the services (channel open listeners) are configured by those
who register them, though ultimately if we (for example) want to add
some additional authorization checks at this level then it would make
more sense to do this globally. Let's make sure that we're not
duplicating security or connector configuration between the management
endpoint and the subsystem one.
--
- DML