Re: [jboss-dev] Bind interfaces coming from ServiceBindingManager

David M. Lloyd wrote: > On 04/23/2009 05:37 PM, Brian Stansberry wrote: >> I think the binding interface for services that open sockets should >> be coming from the ServiceBindingManager, same as the ports do. >> Currently most services use ${jboss.bind.address} to inject the >> address directly into the consuming service. But that precludes a >> management tool using SBM as a central configuration point for all >> address/port usage in the server.[1] Currently it's mostly only >> useful for the ports; if admins wanted to use something other than >> ${jboss.bind.address} for a particular service they'd have to go >> elsewhere in the tool to configure that. >> >> Thoughts? > > Good idea. > > On this topic, it might be a Nice Thing to have a custom XML type for > service binding configuration, so rather than saying: > > <!-- Remote classloading service --> > <bean class="org.jboss.services.binding.ServiceBindingMetadata"> > <property name="serviceName">jboss:service=WebService</property> > <property name="port">8083</property> > </bean> > > You could say: > > <declare-service-binding xmlns="urn:jboss:binding-manager:1.0"> > <service name="jboss:service=WebService"/> > <bind address="${jboss.bind.address}" port="8083"/> > </declare-service-binding> > > or whatever. And instead of injecting the value with bean tags like > this: > > <value> > <value-factory bean="ServiceBindingManager" > method="getStringBinding"> > <parameter>UnifiedInvokerConnector</parameter> > <parameter>${host}</parameter> > </value-factory> > </value> > > you could have e.g. > > <string-binding-value xmlns="urn:jboss:binding-manager:1.0" > service-name="UnifiedInvokerConnector" input="${host}"/> > > Then if (and when) the class name/layout of the service binding data > changes (and judging from the differences between what's in > Branch_5_x and http://www.jboss.org/community/docs/DOC-9038 I'd say > we've already had a few such changes), then the same files will > continue to work. > > Basically, while using xmlns="urn:jboss:bean-deployer:2.0" can be > useful for users to assemble their applications and for certain > internal applications, we should not be using this as a configuration > file format since it exposes implementation details of the underlying > services, which then makes it tough for us to change said services. > Good idea. https://jira.jboss.org/jira/browse/JBAS-6829 Fortunately, the diffs between that design wiki page and the current stuff happened before 5.0.0.GA. But your point is well taken.