Carlos,
Stepping in on your disagreement here, but I think you are a little
confused about the functionality CORBA services provide. Most orbs support a
framework in which implementations of persistence, events and security are
embedded. The services they offer are extremely thin in the areas of true
application functionality. So thin, that they are essentially useless for an
EJB container implementation.
For example, most orbs do not support CORBA SecLevel II for security.
This is because SecLevel II is a highly detailed framework which binds the
implementation's ideas of security entities with application entities
rights. This implies that the applications themselves are aware and fully
cognizant of the security situation in which they execute. Instead, most
orbs implement a SecLevel I service which provides for simple
UserID/Password integration with Kerberos, Certificates or whatever other
authentication mechanism you would like to use. The attraction to this
particular specification is that SecLevel I is fairly transparent to the
applications and thus simple to integrate.
The event services provide transmitter and listener associations. The
actual message topics themselves, what they mean in context and how they are
to be interpreted is left entirely to the applications.
Persistence is the same way.
While it is true that these frameworks can be utilized for creating
"value add" services to jBoss, they do not present a strong enough case for
marrying the container to a given distribution technology.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Carlos Pita" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "jBoss Developer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2000 12:22 PM
Subject: RE: [jBoss-Dev] rmi,transactions,orbs [was: TransactionImpl]
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Rickard �berg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: jBoss Developer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2000 1:30 PM
> Subject: Re: [jBoss-Dev] rmi,transactions,orbs [was: TransactionImpl]
>
> >> 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.
>
> Altough I'm not completely sure about how tighly coupled are persistence
and
> security with jBoss but, if they are plug-able (which is the right word?),
I
> could say that more choices don't hurt ()
>
> >> 7) The corba component model is a more robust ground for a ejb
container
> >> implementation
>
> > Hm.. more robust ground than.. what?
>
> Perhaps this is a matter of taste but I think about it this way:
>
> There are several orb implementations, so there are (some) experience in
the
> field and more choices.
> The orb (and services, etc) design and standarization is a thoughtful and
> long process
> Orb are cospicuous, so they are tested in more scenarios.
>
> >> 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?
>
> Right now, I think that plugging it using the JMX machinery should be
> enough.
>
> Do you have another kind of solution in mind?
>
> >/Rickard
> Carlos
>
> --
> Rickard �berg
>
> Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://www.telkel.com
> http://www.jboss.org
> http://www.dreambean.com
>
>
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> This email server is running an evaluation copy of the MailShield anti-
> spam software. Please contact your email administrator if you have any
> questions about this message. MailShield product info: www.mailshield.com
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This email server is running an evaluation copy of the MailShield anti-
spam software. Please contact your email administrator if you have any
questions about this message. MailShield product info: www.mailshield.com
