>I am assuming that they have none. The devices that provide the UI need to
>be able to communicate directly and simply with the Embedlets. Envision a
>plant operator walking up to a device with his wireless or wired hand-held
>to make adjustments to the system. Requiring JMX as the sole management
>interface would, I think, put a very large infrastructure demand on that
>simple interaction. It would also lock out other socket/XML capable
>interfaces such as ActiveX (yes it still lives), .NET, Perl etc. I agree
>that a JMX/Embedlet Adapter would defintely be a huge boost to the
>acceptablility at the Enterprise management level.
The MBean would not necessarily have to be on the device. If we spec a very
simple text based admin protocol that provides 'events', 'properties' and
'actions', then we can write a single MBean that can run on the managers
device, and talk via a serial network to the device. If you then make that
protocol implementable as a Jini Surrogate implementation, then you could also
use Jini's discovery mechanisms to allow embedlets to announce their presence.
This would facilitate remote management in places where device have a network
to somewhere else.... But a serial port could be used for management of
individual devices.
-----
gr...@cy... (Cyte Technologies Inc)
|
