> How about you also put those ideas somewhere on the wiki at:
> http://stomp.codehaus.org/
>
Done. Here's a page for this kind of material
http://stomp.codehaus.org/Stomp+v1.1+Ideas
> 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?
Cheers
--
Dejan Bosanac
http://www.ttmsolutions.com - get a free ActiveMQ user guide
ActiveMQ in Action - http://www.manning.com/snyder/
Scripting in Java - http://www.scriptinginjava.net
|