I want to use ApacheDS but it does not store binary data right now due to a bug and its not scheduled to be fixed for a few weeks. Basically, I want to have a lightweight directory for storing MBean/References in the directory so that I can use JNDI to get to them easily. This approach is similar to what Geronimo does with it's MBeans and what Weblogic does with it's MBeans. That being said, I do know that ApacheDS is the directory used in Geronimo so I don't know why it would work for them but not for me but that is the information I got from #directory-dev on freenode, the same people that told me to contact you. Ideally, I would like to have the lightweight provider in [naming] but have it networkable. It would be nice not to have the overhead of LDAP but I can go that route if needed. Thanks for getting back to me and for sharing your ideas.
Take care,
Jeremy
On 10/27/05, Phil Steitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Jeremy Whitlock wrote:
> Hey all,
> I would like to use directory-naming in my application but I need
> to enable remote access to the in-memory JNDI provided by
> directory-naming. It would be great to have a user have a PROVIDER_URL
> of jndi://host:port and get a reference to the JNDI provided on the
> server by directory-naming. Can someone assist me with this?
Why not use ldap into ADS directly? If the problem is that [naming]
supports some things not provided by ADS (resource factories?) then it
would make sense to do what Noel suggested some time ago, i.e., to
integrate naming into ADS and use ldap to provide the remote access.
Otherwise, we end up needing to invent another remote binding and
transport protocol, which may not be the best idea.
If what you are after is the resources, a practical issue is that these
are mostly returned by [naming] and other JNDI providers as *references*
to locally generated resource instances - e.g., database connection
pools. Making use of these resources remotely requires a change in
their programming model. Not impossible, but requires that the resource
providers and interface specs currently supported by [naming] be
redesigned. For things like database connection pools, manageability
and security would be problematic.
What is your application trying to do?
Phil
