Hey
Carlos Pita wrote:
> >On the other hand, with pure RMI, no service context fields exist
> >in the JRMP protocol to transport a transaction context (or any other
> >kind of context). So, JOnAS on top of RMI transports the transaction
> >context as an explicit extra parameter in remote method calls.
> >However, with rmi-iiop, the way to transport the transaction service
> >context should be as for Jeremie and JOnAS.
This isn't strictly true. There are hooks for service context fields in
JRMP, they're just not exposed publically. They will (most likely) be
public in JDK 1.4.
> 6) Most orbs offer another services (persistence, events, security) which
> are pertinent to ejb containers implementations.
I think we are better off by doing persistence and security ourselves.
Events is provide by SpyderMQ.
> 7) The corba component model is a more robust ground for a ejb container
> implementation
Hm.. more robust ground than.. what?
> and the way to align with it (not necessarily now and
> possibly never!) is building it on top of a corba (2.3 or 3? we surely need
> a POA) orb.
I don't mind plugging in a ORB for the distribution of the container,
but does it have to be more tightly coupled than that?
/Rickard
--
Rickard �berg
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.telkel.com
http://www.jboss.org
http://www.dreambean.com
