Hi,
Anatoly Akkerman wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Jun 2001, Ole Husgaard wrote:
> > Are you talking about org.jboss.ejb.MethodInvocation?
> > Why should that class be Serializable?
> > It is only used locally on the server.
>
> It is indeed reconstructed from the transport layer representation of the
> invocation. We need a generic structure that would allow both simple
> serializable contexts that can be passed along regardless to the
> underlying transport layer and, perhaps, a way to specify that some
> contexts are transport-layer sensitive. (Like the transaction context,
> which would be handled by IIOP directly). Can we have some kind of
> delegation model to let context-specific handlers map it's own context
> into the underlying transport layer. The default one would be
> serialization.
Tricky. It depends on the wire protocol.
For the JRMP transport, we define our own wire
protocol and remain inoperable (to some extent)
with other systems, so here we can support it
without problems.
But for the IIOP transport, we should conform
strictly to the wire protocol. May still be
possible, but we have to study IIOPs support
for context passing.
But a delegation model would be fine, as we
wouldn't need to know the specifics of the
transport's context passing.
Best Regards,
Ole Husgaard.
_______________________________________________
Jboss-development mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jboss-development
