I was trying to have a centralized repository of destinations and ConnectionFactory. I could use a uniform namespace for destination to avoid conflicting. However, I don't want to allow users creating destination or ConnectionFactory on the fly. I would like them accessing the broker only through administrative objects.
Because my clients are not running inside J2EE container, I am using LDAP for JNDI. I wish ActiveMQ has a built JNDI server in the broker side. Therefore, I don't have to deploy another LDAP server and worry about its HA solution and other topics that we have already invested in the broker side. Thank you. huntc wrote: > > I'm curious as to what is trying to be achieved here. Could you please > explain why it is useful to perform a naming/directory lookup for a queue > or topic name? > > My recommendation is to have well known queue and topic names that are > global in scope. For example, use the java convention to specify a queue > or topic name. Here's one of mine: > > com.classactionpl.flights.javaTopic > -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-JNDI-support-only-for-testing--tp21925743p22562840.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
