[rabbitmq-discuss] Why do we need rabbitmq-web-stomp and why not rabitmq-web-amqp (over websockets)?
paddy.carman at gmail.com
Fri Jul 27 18:19:50 BST 2012
Why is it a bad idea to expose AMQP to web clients? I see at least one
company betting on it: http://kaazing.com/products/amqp-edition
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 4:03 AM, Francesco Mazzoli
<francesco at rabbitmq.com>wrote:
> At Thu, 26 Jul 2012 10:03:28 -0700,
> Paddy Carman wrote:
> > Hi -
> > I'm reading about the rabbitmq-web-stomp plugin. It seem very cool -
> > over Websockets connecting to AMQP backend. My questions:
> > * can we do AMQP over websockets directly and
> > * If so, why do we need STOMP?
> > * Is there any particular advantage of using STOMP?
> Stomp is a tremendously more simple protocol than AMQP, which is why it is
> to have a STOMP-over-SockJS. Moreover, exposing AMQP to the internet is
> not a
> good idea.
> > * Are there performance implications in the STOM<>AMQP translation?
> Not really. The STOMP plugin uses the direct exchange, and converting
> message formats is straightforward.
> Francesco * Often in error, never in doubt
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the rabbitmq-discuss