Me again,
I have made some further thoughts:
If I have an infrastructure like an ESB, I will have something similar
to JMS if the implementation supports WS-RM and a message store. Let´s
say that the serviceprovider is down and not available in the time of
sending a message to the esb. The difference is now that the ESB polls
messages out to get a first connection to an endpoint, while jms uses
another approach by fetching the message from the queue. Can you
evaluate if this overhead is something which makes http useless in the
case that the provider is often not down? Do you see any usecase for
using ws-rm than because it produces so much overhead? It is not better
to use jms than http?
Thanks,
Jens
Paul Fremantle schrieb:
Jens
In theory you could layer these two, but I don't think it makes sense,
as you effectively add double the work of making sure the message is
reliable. What is more commonly discussed is to use Synapse to bridge
between RM and JMS.
Paul
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 9:45 AM, Jens Goldhammer
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
I have a question according ws-rm! Does it also work with jms as
underlying application protocol? In my mind it would make sense to have
reliablity information in the soap-message itself (to make switches
between the protocols), but jms also provides reliable aspects.
Thanks,
Jens
