I think there's probably a lot of old features that are no longer used or not really useful anymore that we could get rid of. Overtime things that might have been a good idea to add 10, 15, 20 years ago outlive their usefulness. The hardest part is trying to figure out if something is actually used or not. There's not a great way to know, we can ask the users list but that's a small subset of actual people using the broker.
On Mon, Nov 9, 2026 at 11:13 AM Matt Pavlovich via dev <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi JB- > > I’m good with that. I’ve updated the GH issue with the note that we’ll remove > FTP blob support in v6.5.0. The PR I have out there hardens the existing URL > parsing, but does not add any new blob support or features. This de-risks the > Apache ActiveMQ source from security issues. > > I’ll add a second PR to remove FTP blob-related classes for v6.5.0. > > GH Issue Remove FTP Blob ref: https://github.com/apache/activemq/issues/2805 > GH PR tighten up URL parsing ref: https://github.com/apache/activemq/pull/2767 > > Thanks, > Matt Pavlovich > > > On Nov 6, 2026, at 11:37 PM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi > > > > I agree with Chris: let's more blob support completely (at least for ftp). > > No need to wait 7.x, I don't think it's heavily used. > > > > Regards > > JB > > > > On Fri, Nov 6, 2026 at 4:43 PM Christopher Shannon > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> > > wrote: > >> My preference is just to remove the BLOB support entirely but at the > >> very least I would remove anything insecure like ftp or http. There's > >> too many security issues with those. > >> > >> I don't know that we need to wait for 7.x to delete FTP, I can't > >> really imagine many people using it given how insecure it is. > >> > >> On Fri, Nov 6, 2026 at 10:32 AM Matt Pavlovich via dev > >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >> > > >> > Hi @dev: > >> > > >> > I’m looking at blob support as an area that could be a valuable feature > >> > to modernize for ActiveMQ deployments. Currently, the implementations > >> > are FTP and HTTP, but it is a compelling feature to address the large > >> > data transfer problem — offload large messages to a side-channel and > >> > send an event over the broker for any interested consumers. > >> > > >> > Specifically, this would enable automatic tiering of payload sizes. For > >> > applications that have a very small number of large messages, but run > >> > IOPS limited volumes the impact can be disruptive (ie 0.5% of > >> > distribution can utilize 33% of IOPS). > >> > > >> > ActiveMQ has all the pieces already in place to negotiate and the > >> > ability to automatically route anything larger than the broker’s > >> > maxFrameSize over to the blob storage service. Currently, only > >> > BlobMessages are routed to Blob URL, but it could be the case an > >> > implementation could automatically route other message types and > >> > re-assemble on the client-side from the side-channel blob endpoint. > >> > > >> > ## Modernization - Part 1 > >> > > >> > a. Harden existing and correct SPI extension points > >> > > >> > PR ref: https://github.com/apache/activemq/pull/2767 > >> > > >> > ## Modernization - Part 2 > >> > > >> > a. Mark FTP as deprecated for removal in 6.x and remove in 7.x > >> > > >> > Thanks, > >> > Matt Pavlovich > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> <mailto:[email protected]> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> <mailto:[email protected]> > >> For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact > >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] For further information, visit: https://activemq.apache.org/contact
