Marina,
Thanks for confirming. Note that I created
https://java.net/jira/browse/EJB_SPEC-105 ; since it seems that certain
implementors disagree. I was hoping something could be added (what
exactly, I'm not sure) to clarify this.
John
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 6:20 PM, Marina Vatkina <marina.vatkina_at_oracle.com>wrote:
> 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>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>> 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
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
>