Re: [regrep-cooperating] Federated Registry Peer

[Farrukh Najmi <Farrukh.Najmi@Sun.COM>]

Hi Zach,

Welcome back.

I agree that there is definitely a need for modeling registry peers in RIM.

It may not have been clear but the "Federated Registry Peer(s)" is modeled in
0.4 by the Registry class to represent a registry peer. As for hostname, all
remote ObjectRefs will have that information for any type of Object (not just
for Registry objects).

--
Regards,
Farrukh


Zachary Alexander wrote:

> All,
> Is there a need for a "Federated Registry Peer(s)"?  This object would hold
> the hostname of peers that maintain copies of cached/replicated information.
> It could be used for managing cached/replicated content.  This could also be
> useful for high availablilty.  An external agent (i.e., application server
> plug-in) can provide HA services to the registry.  Almost every major
> Application server vendor handles HA/Clustering differently.  If an agent
> from the application server simply provides services then we don't have to
> fight the battle over which HA/Clustering mechanism is correct.
>
> zack
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> To subscribe or unsubscribe from this elist use the subscription
> manager: <http://lists.oasis-open.org/ob/adm.pl>