Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-camel-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 70677 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2010 12:46:22 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 24 Jul 2010 12:46:22 -0000 Received: (qmail 60853 invoked by uid 500); 24 Jul 2010 12:46:21 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-camel-users-archive@camel.apache.org Received: (qmail 60568 invoked by uid 500); 24 Jul 2010 12:46:19 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@camel.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@camel.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@camel.apache.org Received: (qmail 60560 invoked by uid 99); 24 Jul 2010 12:46:18 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 12:46:18 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NEUTRAL,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL,URI_HEX X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: 216.139.236.158 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of gert.vanthienen@gmail.com) Received: from [216.139.236.158] (HELO kuber.nabble.com) (216.139.236.158) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 12:46:11 +0000 Received: from sam.nabble.com ([192.168.236.26]) by kuber.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Oce6x-0006o2-5c for users@camel.apache.org; Sat, 24 Jul 2010 05:45:51 -0700 Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2010 05:45:51 -0700 (PDT) From: Gert Vanthienen To: users@camel.apache.org Message-ID: <1279975551170-1977784.post@n5.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: <1279697609120-1686244.post@n5.nabble.com> References: <1279697609120-1686244.post@n5.nabble.com> Subject: Re: Federating Endpoints between separately hosted Servicemix MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org L.S., You could use any kind of transport/protocol supported by Camel to connect the two boxes (HTTP, mina, ...). However, since both ServiceMix boxes already have an embedded ActiveMQ broker, the best solution is probably to configure those brokers to become a network of brokers (cfr. http://activemq.apache.org/networks-of-brokers.html). This way, you can just communicate with the local queue and ActiveMQ will store/forward the message when necessary. If you're already using JBI, you could also use the JBI cluster engine (which uses the same ActiveMQ technique to forward the JBI MessageExchange to the remote box) which allows you to send to a JBI endpoint and then the cluster engine knows whether or not to forward that. Note that JBI only allows for XML payloads though. We are planning to make that same feature availalable for the NMR as well (cfr. https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/SMX4NMR-193) but that's not available in the latest version of ServiceMix yet. Regards, Gert ----- Regards, Gert Vanthienen ------------------------ Open Source SOA: http://fusesource.com Blog: http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com/ -- View this message in context: http://camel.465427.n5.nabble.com/Federating-Endpoints-between-separately-hosted-Servicemix-tp1686244p1977784.html Sent from the Camel - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.