Mailing-List: contact users-help@qpid.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: users@qpid.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of gsim@redhat.com designates
 209.132.183.28 as permitted sender)
Message-ID: <510FFC95.5010907@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 18:23:17 +0000
From: Gordon Sim <gsim@redhat.com>
Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd, Registered in England and Wales under Company
 Registration No. 3798903, Directors: Michael Cunningham (USA), Mark Hegarty
 (Ireland), Matt Parsons (USA), Charlie Peters (USA)
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64;
 rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: users@qpid.apache.org
Subject: Re: [c++]: Progressing AMQP 1.0 support for 0.22 release
References: <510FBD74.4090803@redhat.com>
 <00BCD2BEF4977149A7C7303B4BAEBBE63636CD@ORD2MBX02C.mex05.mlsrvr.com>
 <510FE841.1010408@redhat.com>
 <00BCD2BEF4977149A7C7303B4BAEBBE6363944@ORD2MBX02C.mex05.mlsrvr.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <00BCD2BEF4977149A7C7303B4BAEBBE6363944@ORD2MBX02C.mex05.mlsrvr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 02/04/2013 04:59 PM, Steve Huston wrote:
> Ok, good. I was concerned because I've heard of a major possible AMQP using community who elected not to use AMQP because of the lack of broker federation standardization. I would like this point squashed.

Yes, I have also heard that being raised.  As I say, there is nothing to 
stop a broker establishing links (for message flow in either direction) 
to a process that is in fact another broker implementation.

Whether a give broker supports this and the mechanism by which you 
trigger it will vary from one implementation to another. However the 
actual establishment of the link and the transfer of messages over it is 
standard AMQP that should be supported by any broker (since it is 
indistinguishable from what a sending or receiving client would be doing).

Out of curiosity, what did they use instead? I don't think there is 
anything that standardises more of the problem than AMQP does.

> Is there a chance you'll be able to make progress on this area of Qpid sufficiently to raise the topics at the Feb 18 AMQP F2F? Are you planning to go?

To get it into 0.22 it really needs to be mostly done by the alpha in 
mid-feb, so yes I would hope to have something usable in svn by that time.

I am not able to attend the F2F sadly, but do plan on putting my 
thoughts in a mail to the TC list (I'll post it here as well).

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@qpid.apache.org