I'm going through emails that I missed, and this might be one of those.
The standard JNDI names are expected to be used by all clients (assuming
that the connection properties are defined somewhere).
Best,
-marina
On 1/29/13 4:06 AM, John D. Ament wrote:
> Hi Marina,, experts,
>
> I wanted to revive this thread a little bit. I think Piotr had raised
> some questions that needed some more feedback. Any chance you could
> provide?
>
> Thanks,
>
> John
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 3:05 AM, Piotr Nowicki <info_at_piotrnowicki.com
> <mailto:info_at_piotrnowicki.com>> wrote:
>
> Hello Marina, John
>
> If I may join this conversation - my question was rather similar
> to John's.
>
>
> On 22.11.2012 02:32, Marina Vatkina wrote:
>
> Hi John,
>
> John D. Ament wrote:
>
> Hi Marina,
>
> So I just want to confirm then. Is it your belief that
> the portable JNDI locations should be used for both local
> and remote lookups, based on the current spec (EJB 3.1)?
>
>
> I'm 100% sure the portable JNDI names are defined for both, remote
> and local views. See e.g. the example under "4.4.2.2 Session bean
> exposing multiple client views".
>
>
> Yes, the remote views are also registered as portable JNDI names
> but I believe the question is - should I, as a standalone client
> using the remote business interface, can access the bean using
> portable JNDI name?
>
> I'm sure that different applications within the same application
> server can, without any problems, use the portable JNDI names. The
> question is - can I as a standalone client use something like:
>
> InvocationContext ctx = ...
> MyBean mBean =
> (MyBean)ctx.lookup("java:global/myApp/myModule/myBean!myRemoteItfFQN");
>
> I'd assume that the connection properties are defined somewhere
> (this could be even app-server dependent file / format.) What I
> would like to achieve is to create a standalone client facade for
> remote EJB's and not to be required to change the JNDI names of
> the EJB's when I change the app-server (if I recall, I even have
> some problems between JBoss 6.1 and JBoss AS 7.1)
>
> Right now, e.g. in JBoss AS 7.1 we have the "ejb:" namespace and
> JNDI names which are JBoss-specific.
>
> Are the JNDI names for remote (standalone) clients not
> standardized? What were the rationale behind not standardizing it?
>
> Marina, could you explain (or point to some resource) about remote
> client becoming optional in future Java EE releases?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Piotr
>
>
> Best,
> -marina
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> John
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Marina Vatkina
> <marina.vatkina_at_oracle.com
> <mailto:marina.vatkina_at_oracle.com>
> <mailto:marina.vatkina_at_oracle.com
> <mailto:marina.vatkina_at_oracle.com>>> wrote:
>
> John,
>
> The standard JNDI names are the same for remote and local
> invocations. If you are asking about names that
> include host and
> port of the target server, it's probably a no-go as
> the interop
> (and even remote client) are targeted for becoming
> optional in the
> future Java EE version(s).
>
> Best,
> -marina
>
>
> John D. Ament wrote:
>
> Experts,
>
> A question was raised recently regarding Remote JNDI
> locations. Currently, the specs define
> standardized local
> JNDI names. There is no guarantee that the remote
> names would
> be the same. Is it possible to come up with
> standardized
> naming conventions for remote EJBs (session beans)
> that can be
> looked up in a consistent manner across
> application servers?
>
> Thanks,
>
> John
>
>
>
>