But each SM component can use camel to route internally, then rely on SM to route to the other SM component right?
But it would not be a pure camel routing, but you could still distribute different services. On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 8:48 AM, Willem Jiang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > You can get the 2 different SM engines connected by using the SM's > components not the camel components. > > Willem > > Mick Knutson wrote: > > If you have 2 different SM engines, you could have camelAppA running on > 1, > > then camelAppB running on another one. Could you not at that point route > > from camelAppA to camelAppB? > > > > On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 8:28 AM, Willem Jiang <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >wrote: > > > >> Hi > >> > >> Please see my comments in the mail. > >> > >> Drone42 wrote: > >>> Have I understood it correctly; > >>> > >>> - A CamelContext runs as one application. > >> Yes > >>> - A given instance is thus local. > >> Yes > >>> - If I want a route in a distributed network, then I can use for > example > >>> ServiceMix to integrate Camel instances into a system managing the > >> complete > >>> flow > >> You could use camel-activmq, camel-cxf even camel-file components to > >> build up the distributed network endpoint and using the camel DLS to > >> build the route rule. > >> AFAIK ServiceMix's components are stay in the same JVM. > >> > >> Willem > >> > >> > >> > > > > > > -- Thank You… Mick Knutson BASE Logic, inc. (415) 685-4233 Website: http://baselogic.com Blog: http://baselogic.com/blog BLiNC Magazine: http://blincmagazine.com Linked IN: http://linkedin.com/in/mickknutson DJ Mick: http://djmick.com MySpace: http://myspace.com/mickknutson Vacation Rental: http://tahoe.baselogic.com coming soon: (866-BLiNC-411: (254-6241-1) ---
