[jboss-dev-forums] [JBoss AS Development] - Re: Naming over Remoting 3

[david.lloyd@jboss.com]

"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.

That said, the connection information (at least, as pertains to Remoting 3) could amount to "whatever connection this proxy came in on", and that'd probably be OK.

However, I don't see any sensible way we can get around having separate proxy implementations for IIOP/JRMP/Remoting/whatever.

View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4267067#4267067

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4267067