Sorry - I didn't mean to introduce yet more confusion, I was just wanting to encourage good practice/caution. There's no need for this to open any holes, there are ways of securing a SVRCONN channel via e.g. SSL - this is fine in native WMQ but I don't know whether the ActiveMQ bridging piece can deal with that. I assume so since it looks like it is just using the MQQueueConnectionFactory from the IBM WMQ JMS classes and that can deal with SSL. You can also use the WMQ Object Authority Manager to restrict the permissions of the connecting user. This is all http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/wmqv7/v7r0/topic/com.ibm.mq.csqzaw.doc/jm10120_.htm in the WMQ docs online.
peterjca wrote: > The requirement is for our application to use a local messaging server so > that the application is completely unaffected by any downtime their WMQ > might suffer. OK so in that case I can't see how you can get away without having a WMQ Queue Manager (messaging server) right next to your app and doing server<->server comms to theirs. I'm willing to be proven wrong by another member of the community here. We're certainly a bit off-base for this list - you might find helpful peer support at http://mqseries.net http://mqseries.net if you want to discuss the product further, I was just trying to help - apologies to anyone if the discussion has swerved away from AMQ specifics. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/ActiveMQ-integration-with-WebSphere-MQ-tp3550031p3564232.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
