This is what we have been using to represent JBoss remoting URI's so
far. I do agree that is is a bit ambiguous.
Stuart
Darran Lofthouse wrote:
Sounds good, just one point before it reaches a point people are
using
it - Is 'remote' really a suitable protocol name?
Within Remoting JMX the reason I went for 'remoting-jmx' was to indicate
that it was JMX over Remoting.
RMI is also considered remote so I think having a protocol of 'remote'
is ambiguous.
Regards,
Darran Lofthouse.
On 28/03/13 10:15, Stuart Douglas wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> Now that we are using Undertow as the domain management HTTP server it
> is now possible to use a HTTP upgrade for the native management and
> remote-jmx protocols. This will allow us to run all management protocols
> over port 9990, and allow us to remove 9999 from our default config. The
> idea is significantly reduce the ports that are open in our default
> config, ideally eventually we will just have a management and
> application HTTP ports and that will be it (although some technologies
> such as CORBA are not compatible with HTTP Upgrade).
>
> With this in mind I have started working on a series of patches[1] to
> implement this, that I am hoping will be ready to merge early next week.
> (These patches are still a work in progress, but the core functionality
> works).
>
> For those of you who are not familiar with HTTP upgrade it is a
> mechanism where a client makes a HTTP request to the client with the
> Upgrade: header set, the server will then respond with a HTTP 101
> response. In our implementation the server then hands the channel over
> to JBoss Remoting which then performs its normal handshake, including
> authentication.
>
> The upshot of all this will be:
>
> - We no longer have port 9999 open by default, which will break older
> clients that attempt to talk to a default AS8 instance (it will still be
> possible to add a native interface to allow it to work with older
> clients).
>
> - ModelControllerClient.Factory.create() now allows you to specify a
> protocol, which can be either remote, http or https.
>
> - Remote JMX will now require a service:jmx:http(s)-remoting-jmx:// URL
> rather than the current service:jmx:remoting-jmx://
>
> I have not touched domain management yet, and these patches are not yet
> ready for merging, but because this is a fairly big change I thought I
> would get peoples thoughts before I finish it off and submit a PR.
>
> Stuart
>
> [1]
>
https://github.com/stuartwdouglas/xnio/compare/http-upgrade
>
https://github.com/stuartwdouglas/jboss-remoting/compare/http-upgrade
>
https://github.com/stuartwdouglas/remoting-jmx/compare/http-upgrade
>
https://github.com/stuartwdouglas/jboss-as/compare/http-upgrade
> _______________________________________________
> jboss-as7-dev mailing list
> jboss-as7-dev(a)lists.jboss.org
>
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/jboss-as7-dev
>