Hi All,
<vendors-perspective>
As far as different JNDI Names for Home and Remote are concerned, the
specification does not recommend any particular approach. Our inference
is that separate JNDI names are not required. The container can
automatically resolve to the correct type based on the type of tag used to
specify the ejb reference.
In case the JNDI look up is across VMs then only the Remote Interface
Reference will be available.
In case of the look up in the same VM the way the look up is done will
determine whether the look up it is remote or local reference. For e.g.: in
the same VM a remote lookup will have the following semantics:
ic.lookup("BeanJNDIName");// Give the real JNDIName as lookup string
ic.lookup("java:comp/env/ejb/RemoteSymbolicName);//or using a a <ejb-ref>
tag.
In case of a local reference, the look up semantics will be specified using
a <ejb-LOCAL-ref> tag.
ic.lookup("java:comp/env/ejb/LocalSymbolicName);
In this case, at the time of deployment the symbolic name will be resolved
to the same JNDI name "BeanJNDIName" by the deployer and the
container will automatically resolve it to the local reference or remote
reference depending on the type of ejb-ref tag ( local or remote) when the
lookup is made.
The Pramati implementation uses a single JNDI name even if the bean has both
local and remote interfaces. In case the Bean has a local interface alone
then it is not available across VMs through JNDI. In the same VM only java
contextual look ups ( "java:comp/env..") are suported for local Beans.
I would like to know opnions and suggestions.
</vendors-perspective>
Amit Khanna
(www.pramati.com)
----- Original Message -----
From: Cedric Beust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 9:51 PM
Subject: Re: JNDI NAME FOR LOCAL INTERFACE ?
> > From: A mailing list for Enterprise JavaBeans development
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Gautam Borah
>
> > Coming back to my original point, IMHO the Local Interfaces should not
be
> > exposed through JNDI names, as they are not available in the
network(They
> > are not remote, nor serializable). These interfaces should be accessed
> > through only by the <ejb-local-ref> and the Container should be able to
> > resolve this at the deployment time. *Having two JNDI names for the same
> > bean !!* , specification is not very much clear about this issue
> > and is very much debatable.
>
> Good points. The compromise WLS 6.1 adopted for now is to bind the local
> home in the JNDI tree but not make it serializable, so it can't be looked
up
> from a remote client.
>
> Probably not the best solution but it obeys the principle of least
surprise.
> Any suggestions to improve it will be very welcome.
>
> --
> Cedric
>
>
===========================================================================
> To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the
body
> of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
>
===========================================================================
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body
of the message "signoff EJB-INTEREST". For general help, send email to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and include in the body of the message "help".
