activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mittler, Nathan" <>
Subject RE: [stomp-dev] RE: STOMP and connect/connected handshake
Date Mon, 12 Jun 2006 14:47:17 GMT
Agreed.  So let's go with a new set of headers.

I propose the following:

request-id (goes in any STOMP client->broker request command ...
currently only CONNECT)

response-id (goes in any STOMP client<-broker response command ...
currently only CONNECTED)

I've changed "command-id" to "request-id" so that it's clearer that the
two headers are related.

How does this sound?


-----Original Message-----
From: James Strachan [] 
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 10:28 AM
Subject: Re: [stomp-dev] RE: STOMP and connect/connected handshake

FWIW the correlation-id currently maps to JMSCorrelationID - but is
only used on JMS messages rather than on commands like CONNECT etc.

Though the JMSCorrelationID is often an out of band correlation;
rather than correlating a request stomp command to a stomp response;
so maybe another header name would avoid confusion?

On 6/12/06, Mittler, Nathan <> wrote:
> There is already a correlation-id header defined in the AMQ
> - I was trying to reuse this
> header for the connect handshake.  I don't feel that strongly one way
> the other. The name "response-id" is fine - we'd just have to add
> another header to our list of extensions (we'd have to do that for the
> "command-id" header anyway).
> Nate
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [] On Behalf Of Hiram
> Chirino
> Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 10:05 AM
> To:;
> Subject: Re: STOMP and connect/connected handshake
> Cross posting to the stomp mailing list too since someone there might
> have some input on this.
> I like the idea about supporting a command-id header.  I might prefer
> the correlation header to be called response-id instead of
> correlation-id.
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Nathan Mittler <>
> Date: Jun 12, 2006 6:13 AM
> Subject: STOMP and connect/connected handshake
> To:
> For the new activemq-cpp library, we need to extend the STOMP
> connect/connected handshake so that we get back a correlation-id for
> response correlator.  To do this, we need to send something in the
> connect
> request that contains a client-defined command-id.  My first thought
> to
> just reuse the message-id header, but that is typically reserved for
> cases
> when a client is expecting to acknowledge a message.  So rather than
> risk
> breaking that paradigm, I created a new header "command-id" that is
> used on the connect message.  When the broker receives a connect
> with a command-id header, it creates a connected response with a
> correlation-id set to the command-id of the original request.  This
> the
> client can treat the handshake as a true request/response.
> Does anyone see any problems with adding this to the broker?
> Regards,
> Nate
> --
> Regards,
> Hiram
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list please visit:



To unsubscribe from this list please visit:

View raw message