directory-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Phil Steitz" <>
Subject RE: [naming] Enable Remote JNDI Access
Date Thu, 27 Oct 2005 18:47:33 GMT
I understand and am intrigued by the idea, just stuck on the protocol invention bit.  Any ideas
on how to do this using another more lightweight standard protocol? 

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: Jeremy Whitlock [] 
	Sent: Thu 10/27/2005 10:30 AM 
	To: Apache Directory Developers List 
	Subject: Re: [naming] Enable Remote JNDI Access
	     I want to use ApacheDS but it does not store binary data right now due to a bug and
its not scheduled to be fixed for a few weeks.  Basically, I want to have a lightweight directory
for storing MBean/References in the directory so that I can use JNDI to get to them easily.
 This approach is similar to what Geronimo does with it's MBeans and what Weblogic does with
it's MBeans.  That being said, I do know that ApacheDS is the directory used in Geronimo so
I don't know why it would work for them but not for me but that is the information I got from
#directory-dev on freenode, the same people that told me to contact you.  Ideally, I would
like to have the lightweight provider in [naming] but have it networkable.  It would be nice
not to have the overhead of LDAP but I can go that route if needed.  Thanks for getting back
to me and for sharing your ideas.
	Take care,
	On 10/27/05, Phil Steitz <> wrote: 

		Jeremy Whitlock wrote:
		> Hey all,
		>      I would like to use directory-naming in my application but I need
		> to enable remote access to the in-memory JNDI provided by
		> directory-naming.  It would be great to have a user have a PROVIDER_URL 
		> of jndi://host:port and get a reference to the JNDI provided on the
		> server by directory-naming.  Can someone assist me with this?
		Why not use ldap into ADS directly?  If the problem is that [naming] 
		supports some things not provided by ADS (resource factories?) then it
		would make sense to do what Noel suggested some time ago, i.e., to
		integrate naming into ADS and use ldap to provide the remote access.
		Otherwise, we end up needing to invent another remote binding and 
		transport protocol, which may not be the best idea.
		If what you are after is the resources, a practical issue is that these
		are mostly returned by [naming] and other JNDI providers as *references*
		to locally generated resource instances - e.g., database connection
		pools.  Making use of these resources remotely requires a change in
		their programming model.  Not impossible, but requires that the resource
		providers and interface specs currently supported by [naming] be 
		redesigned.  For things like database connection pools, manageability
		and security would be problematic.
		What is your application trying to do?

View raw message