activemq-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From ar13 <andrew...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Securing active MQ
Date Fri, 23 Jan 2009 17:21:08 GMT

I have scrapped the uri addition . 

I tried changing the broker name property and the useLocalHostBrokerName to
false. 

However the problem is unchanged AMQ still gets the machine DNS name from
the public interface and then complains that it is unable to resolve the
public DNS name on the private interface .

Has anyone implemented AMQ in a setup where 2 networks overlap ? Are there
other options for securing the JMS traffic between broker and clients ? 



ar13 wrote:
> 
> I also tried adding 
>  " ?useLocalHost=true " to the Transport connector
> as follows 
> 
>  <transportConnector name="openwire"
> uri="tcp://192.168.98.101:61616?useLocalHost=true" />
> 
> which also fails, AMQ still gets the machine domain name from the public
> interface and then tries to resolve that name on the private network
> interface. 
> 
> Is this bug or is there something i am missing .? It seems strange that
> restricting AMQ is so difficult. AMQ start correctly when i let is auto
> discover but this in effect makes the server into a bridge into a private
> network . 
> 
> any suggestions ? 
> 
> 
> ar13 wrote:
>> 
>> Ok i set the broker name..and commented out the network connect line.
>> 
>> However I still get "unknown host exception" .. the host name in the
>> error is the  domain name of the server but AMQ must be getting that
>> information over the other "public" interface ..which i have not used in
>> the config .
>> 
>> Is there there any way to tell AMQ to stop trying to resolve names ?? and
>> to stay within the interface is have designated ? 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Securing-active-MQ-tp21612521p21628818.html
Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


Mime
View raw message