Hi, I've tried this with both the default broker config (multicast discovery), and rendezvous.
Brokers on Windows hosts find each other and transfer messages amongst themselves, no problems. With one or more linux hosts involved however I start seeing errors like these in the output from the message brokers: WARN DiscoveryNetworkConnector - Could not start network bridge between: vm://localhost and: tcp://Shrubuntu:61616 due to: java.net.UnknownHostException: Shrubuntu INFO DemandForwardingBridge - localhost bridge to Unknown stopped INFO DiscoveryNetworkConnector - Establishing network connection between from vm://localhost to tcp://Shrubuntu:61616 WARN DiscoveryNetworkConnector - Could not start network bridge between: vm://localhost and: tcp://Shrubuntu:61616 due to: java.net.UnknownHostException: Shrubuntu INFO DemandForwardingBridge - localhost bridge to Unknown stopped INFO DiscoveryNetworkConnector - Establishing network connection between from vm://localhost to tcp://Shrubuntu:61616 So I'm thinking the brokers find each other by hostname, and then need to convert to IP address...which they can't because there is no nameserver for the linux hosts. (I'm not sure how Windows avoids this problem - I assume its inbuilt network browsing maintains the mapping and therefore functions like a nameserver). I can't solve it by adding entries to /etc/hosts on the linux boxes - even if I was up for the maintenance overhead, we cannot guarantee static IP addresses all places we will be deploying. I imagine running a nameserver on one of the linux hosts will resolve it - again I'd rather not do that, just a bit more complexity on our deployed network, and another point of failure. It's a short term solution, but not ideal when we are deploying for real. So I was wondering if there is a way of configuring the message brokers to avoid the problem - e.g. discover each other by IP address , no need for hostname conversions. Didn't find anything in the ActiveMQ documentation or FAQ. I did however comes across this in the forum: http://www.nabble.com/-activemq-user---zeroconf-problem-with-local-hostnames-to658016.html#a658016 Sounds like exactly the sort of thing I'm looking for - did anything ever come of it? Any other alternative solutions spring to anybody's mind? -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/5.2.0---Problem-with-broker-discovery-on-linux---hostnames-not-resolved-tp24609539p24609539.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
