"genman" wrote : The thing with the removal and addition of interceptors is ... the APIs are a little hokey. Working with index numbers isn't as nice as with objects. | | I was thinking (and it's too late to change, but ...) Interceptors themselves have a specific dependency or ordering to them. And rather than specify the ordering explicitly, the API would be add(Interceptor). You could have a remove(Interceptor) (symmetric call) as well that scans using object identity. | | I do agree that bypassing certain interceptors should be drive by options, not an API call. (It'd be nice if this was done in some generic way. Off topic, but overhauling the interceptor chain is something I have planned for 2.1.0. See http://jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&t=112842 for early discussions around this. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4065307#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...