[wildfly-dev] HTTP Upgrade for AS8 Management

[Darran Lofthouse]

Created the following for Remoting JMX: -

   https://issues.jboss.org/browse/REMJMX-85

Will drop the 'jmx' portion from the scheme.

Regards,
Darran Lofthouse.


On 02/06/14 19:18, David M. Lloyd wrote:
> Yes.
>
> On 06/02/2014 11:46 AM, Darran Lofthouse wrote:
>> So just to be clear, you believe it should be 'remote' not 'remoting'?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Darran Lofthouse.
>>
>>
>> On 02/06/14 17:42, David M. Lloyd wrote:
>>> On 03/28/2013 05:15 AM, Stuart Douglas wrote:
>>>> - ModelControllerClient.Factory.create() now allows you to specify a
>>>> protocol, which can be either remote, http or https.
>>>>
>>>> - Remote JMX will now require a service:jmx:http(s)-remoting-jmx:// URL
>>>> rather than the current service:jmx:remoting-jmx://
>>>
>>> Unfortunately I missed-slash-bungled this way back when, but we need to
>>> sort out our URI schemes.
>>>
>>> When we have multi-layer protocol going on, the URI scheme we should use
>>> is like this:
>>>
>>>       outer+middle+inner://
>>>
>>> where "outer" is the outermost protocol (e.g. "remote"), and "inner" is
>>> the innermost (not counting layer 3 and lower *unless* that figures
>>> directly in to the URI scheme; an example of this sub-case is
>>> "stratum+tcp" vs "stratum+udp").
>>>
>>> So we *should* have:
>>>
>>>       remote://           Direct Remoting-protocol connection
>>>       remote+http://      Remoting over HTTP upgrade
>>>       remote+https://     Remoting over HTTPS upgrade
>>>
>>> And (if these are even really needed; I think we dropped this
>>> distinction though maybe I'm wrong):
>>>
>>>       jmx+remote://       JMX over Remoting
>>>       jmx+remote+http://  JMX over Remoting over HTTP
>>>       jmx+remote+https:// JMX over Remoting over HTTPS
>>>
>>> The most common "de facto" function of hyphenation in a URI scheme is to
>>> be a separator for a two-word protocol, like "view-source" or "ms-help"
>>> etc.  The most common "de facto" function of using "+" is as I've
>>> described above, perhaps made most popular by Subversion's use.
>>>
>>> You may be wondering: Why not apply this to every single protocol we
>>> have?  And/or every single protocol in existence?  I think this goes
>>> beyond practicality - the point is to be unambiguous and consistent, and
>>> also align on the correct "remote" scheme name (we have a mix of
>>> "remote" and "remoting" today which is kind of confusing).
>>>
>>> Fixing this is not really a top priority obviously, but I would like to
>>> eventually unify our configuration on these scheme names (still
>>> supporting the old scheme names for compatibility of course).
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> wildfly-dev mailing list
>> wildfly-dev at lists.jboss.org
>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/wildfly-dev
>>
>
>