Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-activemq-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 91044 invoked from network); 24 Mar 2006 20:35:28 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 24 Mar 2006 20:35:28 -0000 Received: (qmail 13401 invoked by uid 500); 24 Mar 2006 20:35:28 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-geronimo-activemq-users-archive@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 13377 invoked by uid 500); 24 Mar 2006 20:35:28 -0000 Mailing-List: contact activemq-users-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: activemq-users@geronimo.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list activemq-users@geronimo.apache.org Received: (qmail 13367 invoked by uid 99); 24 Mar 2006 20:35:28 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 24 Mar 2006 12:35:28 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.9 required=10.0 tests=FORGED_YAHOO_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of lists@nabble.com designates 72.21.53.35 as permitted sender) Received: from [72.21.53.35] (HELO talk.nabble.com) (72.21.53.35) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 24 Mar 2006 12:35:27 -0800 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=talk.nabble.com) by talk.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1FMszy-0002R1-HH for activemq-users@geronimo.apache.org; Fri, 24 Mar 2006 12:35:06 -0800 Message-ID: <3578780.post@talk.nabble.com> Date: Fri, 24 Mar 2006 12:35:06 -0800 (PST) From: d j To: activemq-users@geronimo.apache.org Subject: Re: jms routing In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Nabble-Sender: jin_dsoft@yahoo.com X-Nabble-From: d j References: <3561517.post@talk.nabble.com> <3573788.post@talk.nabble.com> <3577310.post@talk.nabble.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Just a little further., Let's imagine a grid computing network for instance. All gridlet has same queue, but identified by fqdn (full qualified domain name). A publishing to an queue will publish to a queue with domain name. The broker on the edge will route the message to the right destination. In that sense of routing, it will really make the activeMQ a much bigger player. Otherwise, it will be used in very limited system and stays nitch. -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/jms-routing-t1333152.html#a3578780 Sent from the ActiveMQ - User forum at Nabble.com.