"weston.price(a)jboss.com" wrote : This would be an unusual case as most JMS providers provide both a non XA and an optional XA CF to create the underlying connection. | | JBM would be the only JMS provider I have seen to date where you could not deploy a non XA JMS resource. WebSphereMQ, TIBCO, ActiveMQ, JBossMQ etc provide XA as an option as this is the only behavior mandated by the spec where the XA is optional. | | Well, yes I agree this may be unusual, although I don't believe it it illegal. It seems to me the JCA is making an incorrect assumption that a particular connection instance can't be both a Connection and an XAConnection. It just so happens up to now JBM is the only provider that implements it this way. Having said all that, to get this fixed quickly, it should be fairly trivial for us to make the change in JBM to separate out the Connection and XAConnection classes. So I suggest we do that. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4039605#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...