[rabbitmq-discuss] AMQP 0-9-1 released
chime at mu.dk
Mon Dec 8 14:32:40 GMT 2008
A bit late but I think this very good news. Now let's hope all
implementers will implement 0.9.1 :-)
On Nov 20, 2008, at 12:15 , Alexis Richardson wrote:
> The RabbitMQ team is very pleased to announce that the AMQP 0-9-1
> specification was approved by the AMQP Working Group in a vote
> The need for AMQP 0-9-1 arose from the AMQP community and AMQP
> customers. The community wants interoperability - indeed this is a
> major goal of AMQP. People frequently try to download a broker from
> one implementor, and use it with a client from another implementor.
> Even when both sets of code implement the same specification, this has
> not always worked 'out of the box'.
> Frequently asked questions have included "how to I do I .."
> * get OpenAMQ's C client working with RabbitMQ,
> * or get RabbitMQ's Java client to work with OpenAMQ
> * use QPid's M2.1 JMS-style Java client with RabbitMQ
> This has all been possible and people have done it, but in each case
> it has been a few hours of coding to get it working, without the
> assurance you want from a fully QAd or regression-tested and certified
> So I think we all want interop to work out of the box and many people
> have said they expect this too. Interop would also remove cost from
> "business to business" integration projects.
> AMQP 0-9-1 was created to meet that need. It is a simplified 'interop
> release' that starts from the 0-9 specification and then fixes interop
> bugs and removes a lot of unused material. For reasons of backwards
> compatibility with certain existing deployments, the 0-9-1 spec will
> work with 0-9 wire frames. This means that the community can expect
> to get what it demands: a set of brokers and clients that work
> The work to achieve this clean up was a collective effort and
> represents 18 months of 'lessons learnt in production' by all the
> major AMQP implementations in the 0-8/0-9 family. Documents should
> appear on http://www.amqp.org imminently. Thank-you to all those
> involved on behalf of the RabbitMQ team.
> I should also explain what AMQP 0-9-1 is *not*. It does not
> interoperate with AMQP 0-10. AMQP 0-10 introduces technology for
> transactional 'once and only once' delivery within the protocol.
> Similar features are planned for AMQP 1.0 which is currently under
> development by the Working Group. So please see 0-9-1 as a
> stabilisation of earlier spec work, based on hard experience in
> production with the 0-8 and 0-9 protocols. Current and future
> protocol work concerns the step up to the 1.0 business requirements as
> published on http://www.amqp.org.
> What does this mean for RabbitMQ users?
> Interop is good news for RabbitMQ because we think messaging should
> 'just work'. RabbitMQ will implement AMQP 0-9-1 on the 1.x tree.
> AMQP 0-9-1 is absurdly similar to 0-8 and 0-9, which is one reason we
> found the 'interop delta' so frustrating.
> For RabbitMQ users this means a migration path not much more complex
> than (say) moving from RabbitMQ 1.3 to 1.4. Existing deployments will
> continue to work but some methods - eg. access tickets - are now
> formally deprecated. For implementors of clients, the cost of
> upgrading to 0-9-1 should not be more than a day's coding in most
> cases. RabbitMQ will provide updated client codegen tools when an
> 0-9-1 broker is released.
> In terms of timing and details of the RabbitMQ 1.x broker roadmap, I
> refer you to the development team. For discussions on this as well as
> packaging dependencies, and client release plans, we strongly urge the
> community to come forward with comments, questions and offers of
> We hope the RabbitMQ community places a high value on 0-9-1 interop -
> as high as we do as providers of the product. I cannot speak here for
> the other implementations but we have good reason to believe that
> their respective communities will value 0-9-1 interop equally highly.
> But if you see gaps - please jump in and help with some code or
> requirements. Or - even better - provide some test harnesses. And if
> you see any errata then you can also list them here.
> What about 2009?
> With interest growing in AMQP around the community, and the Working
> Group being joined by Microsoft, we think AMQP is in good shape for
> the future.
> Members of the RabbitMQ community who wish to contribute to the
> development of the protocol as we move towards 1.0, should not be shy
> of speaking up on this list. We aim to track this spec and invite
> implementation ideas for RabbitMQ 2.0. We don't want to rush things -
> RabbitMQ's existing implementations set a high bar. Stability at
> scale, and ease of use, are of the utmost importance.
> So - finally - I think this is a very good time to say a big thank-you
> to everyone who has made RabbitMQ successful so far. Thank-you!
> Best wishes,
> rabbitmq-discuss mailing list
> rabbitmq-discuss at lists.rabbitmq.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 1912 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.rabbitmq.com/pipermail/rabbitmq-discuss/attachments/20081208/3659e95b/attachment.bin
More information about the rabbitmq-discuss