"david.lloyd(a)jboss.com" wrote : "wolfc" wrote : The most important bit herein is that the proxy itself should not contain any transport information. Whatever we put into JNDI is not fully aware of the network topology. Take for example a NAT firewall. In that case only the client knows how to communicate to AS. Although we could inform the server somehow, it is really outside of its scope. | | The proxy would have to know some transport information. If it does not, there is no way for the client (or whoever reads the proxy from JNDI) to know where it's connecting back to, or how. For a cluster it's more tricky. The client might know how it connected to the JNDI server but it won't have any idea how to connect to the other nodes in the cluster. "david.lloyd(a)jboss.com" wrote : However, I don't see any sensible way we can get around having separate proxy implementations for IIOP/JRMP/Remoting/whatever. Are we finally going to get rid of JRMPInvoker in AS 6? View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4267074#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...