I'm adding a simple service to bindings.xml that can convert ServiceBindingManager values into system properties. | <!-- Conversion of selected bindings into system properties --> | <bean name="SystemPropertyBinder" | class="org.jboss.services.binding.SystemPropertyBinder"> | | <constructor> | <parameter> | <set> | <!-- JBM's remoting connector --> | <bean class="org.jboss.services.binding.SystemPropertyBinding"> | <constructor> | <parameter>jboss.messaging.connector.bisocket.port</parameter> | <parameter class="int"> | <value-factory bean="ServiceBindingManager" method="getIntBinding" | parameter="jboss.messaging:service=Connector,transport=bisocket"/> | </parameter> | </constructor> | </bean> | </set> | </parameter> | </constructor> | | </bean> | | This is to support the JBM usage discussed at http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4169967#.... I imagine it might be useful for some other cases as well; perhaps JGroups configurations where users want strictly defined ports rather than letting JGroups find an available port. JGroups uses custom parsing of its protocol stack configurations, so system properties are the only mechanism for passing in dynamic values. Downside to this approach is the consuming service no longer has an explicit dependency on the SBM (which is also the upside ;-) ). But, the Naming service depends on SBM, so SBM is always going to deploy very early. If services using this system property approach are careful and understand their dependency relationships, this should be safe enough. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4170426#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...