Re: discovery multicast multihomed

Still no success with: With the following: I get: -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/discovery-multicast-multihomed-tp4669362p4669453.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: discovery multicast multihomed

I experience this with release 5.8 as well as with 5.9 snapshot. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/discovery-multicast-multihomed-tp4669362p4669441.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: discovery multicast multihomed

What I forgot to ask is: Any ideas? Thanks in advance! Uli -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/discovery-multicast-multihomed-tp4669362p4669405.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Discovery Protocol is dependent on Multicast?

As an alternative to the Multicast/UDP (and Zeroconf), http://activemq.apache.org/ldap-broker-discovery-mechanism.html describes "discovery" using LDAP look-up. I haven't used this method, but you could try that. - Michael Hayes B.Sc. (NUI), M.Sc. (DCU), SCSA SCNA -- View this message i

Re: discovery in Activemq

Hi All Please look into the issue and help us to solve the same thanks. -- View this message in context: http://activemq.2283324.n4.nabble.com/discovery-in-Activemq-tp3587771p3619873.html Sent from the ActiveMQ - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Discovery and NMS

Thanks Tim. It's much better now. And it seems to work. I'll be doing some tests with it for the next week. There is however, a very annoying bug with the parallel Java functionality: https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/AMQ-2283 So it's too soon to be happy ... :) Thanks again. Timothy

Re: Discovery and NMS

On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 14:21 -0700, Eric Bouer wrote: > Hello Jim > Unfortunately I can't confirm it's working > Using activemq:failover > (discovery:multicast://default,tcp://activemqhost:61616) > I've got : > "Connect fail to 'discovery:multicast://default': Composite connection not > supported

Re: Discovery and NMS

is one and discovery is the first major feature scheduled to be worked on. However if we are able to find a simple fix that can be thrown in during the release phase, I'm sure it can be considered. - Jim -Original Message- From: Eric Bouer Date: Wed, 10 Jun 2009 14:21:37 T

Re: Discovery and NMS

Hello Jim Unfortunately I can't confirm it's working Using activemq:failover (discovery:multicast://default,tcp://activemqhost:61616) I've got : "Connect fail to 'discovery:multicast://default': Composite connection not supported with MulticastDiscovery transport." Using activemq:discovery:mul

Re: Discovery and NMS

Hi Eric (And John West), I haven't been able to get the auto-discovery to work yet, but from your sample connection strings, I think you will need to change them to the following to have any chance of getting them to work: activemq:discovery:multicast://default or activemq:failover:discovery:m

Re: Discovery and NMS

Hi jim. First I'd like to thank you for your work. I guess you know that you can turn on auto-discovery and still make your broker not join the store-and-forward network. I just changed the multicast group name and brokers dont talk with each other. basically what I'm trying to do is to start my N

Re: Discovery and NMS

Hi Eric, I have been trying to test whether discovery works, but I am not sure I have things configured correctly. I usually turn off the auto-discovery on the broker because we have so many in our development environment that they start to cross-talk with each other and contaminate our tests. I'

Re: Discovery and NMS

There are some problems in its address parsing code that I am working on right now. I have not been able to confirm anthing beyond that yet. - Jim -Original Message- From: Eric Bouer Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2009 09:33:47 To: Subject: Re: Discovery and NMS Can anyone confirm it&#

Re: Discovery and NMS

Can anyone confirm it's working ? Or any other information on discovery in NMS ? semog wrote: > > I have not used the discovery code additions. Are there any unit test > samples that use it that might give you an idea on the format? If there > aren't, we should probably add some. You may wa

Re: Discovery and NMS

I have not used the discovery code additions. Are there any unit test samples that use it that might give you an idea on the format? If there aren't, we should probably add some. You may want to look around for a Java sample. No guarantees, but it might give an indication on what the format mi

Re: Discovery & Store and Forwarding Queues

enable full logging http://activemq.apache.org/how-can-i-enable-detailed-logging.html and you should see a NetworkConnector and DemandForwardingBridge emmit relevant log information re bridge creation and subscription propagation. 2009/1/16 project2501 : > > Thanks Gary. > > The interfaces suppor

Re: Discovery & Store and Forwarding Queues

Thanks Gary. The interfaces support multicast (I'm on ubuntu). What should be seen in each brokers log when they auto-discover on startup? Does 5.2.0 currently perform this auto-discovery multicast for store and forward correctly? I read the other thread that suggests there is a bug here? than

Re: Discovery & Store and Forwarding Queues

long shot I know, but would the following be relevant: http://activemq.apache.org/multicast-watch-out-for-ipv6-vs-ipv4-support-on-your-operating-system-or-distribution-or-network.html 2009/1/14 project2501 : > > Hi, > I read that multicast broker discovery is enabled by default and in my > 5.2 A

Re: discovery

On Jun 13, 2007, at 5:56 AM, Torsten Curdt wrote: How do I register the transport for the URI prefix "zeroconf". I just cannot find how :) look in org.apache.activemq.transport.discovery.rendezvous in the META-INF subdir of the jar, there's files that AMQ uses to discover what classes to us

Re: discovery

On 13.06.2007, at 12:44, James Strachan wrote: On 6/13/07, Torsten Curdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: What I am investigation atm is service discovery and consequent inter service communication. ActiveMQ with zeroconf for broker discovery looks like a good fit for what I am after. So I am playin

Re: discovery

On 6/13/07, Torsten Curdt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: What I am investigation atm is service discovery and consequent inter service communication. ActiveMQ with zeroconf for broker discovery looks like a good fit for what I am after. So I am playing with 4.1.1. Doing my first baby steps I thought

Re: Discovery Fail if no Broker

I am currently using ActiveMQ version 4.1.1 and run into the exact same problem. Wondering if this bug not fixed or my configuration is wrong? Thanks, Lisa Hiram Chirino wrote: > > Then this looks like a bug on ActiveMQ.. Could you past that info into > a new JIRA issue at: > > http://issues.