activemq-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dejan Bosanac <>
Subject Re: Stomp v1.1 Thoughts
Date Wed, 24 Sep 2008 12:18:05 GMT

> How about you also put those ideas somewhere on the wiki at:
Done. Here's a page for this kind of material

> Some of the things I see missing in STOMP are:
> - Optional Keep Alive protocol.  Right now we have to depend on the OS
> to detect socket failure to time out a dead client.  Would be nice if
> the client could optionally agree to send a Keep Alive commands when
> the connection is idle.  That way the sever can detect dead clients
> quicker.
I'd definitely keep this optional, since most Stomp clients implement
just basic blocked reading of the socket (waiting for the next frame).

> - Perhaps standardize a 'host' header in the CONNECT frame to specify
> the host name that the client is connecting to.  This would allow
> implementing virtual hosting where multiple DNS host entries point at
> the same STOMP server.
This would rock. I wonder how we could support virtual hosting in
ActiveMQ ... Should it be done, by allocating a different path hierarchy
for each host, so for example /queue/A on host1 would physically be
queue://host1/A, etc?


Dejan Bosanac - get a free ActiveMQ user guide

ActiveMQ in Action -
Scripting in Java -

View raw message