[rabbitmq-discuss] Implementation / Specification Stability?

Landon Fuller landonf at threerings.net
Tue Oct 23 18:42:02 BST 2007

On Oct 23, 2007, at 03:40, Tony Garnock-Jones wrote:

> Tony Garnock-Jones wrote:
>> Perhaps have a realm for the services? Client users would be  
>> permitted
>> only to write to exchanges/queues in the realm, and Server users  
>> would
>> be permitted only to read (and of course to create
>> queues/exchanges/bindings - this is the "active" permission).
> Of course, clients need reply queues. You'd perhaps use either the
> default realm, /data, for that, or set up a realm specifically for  
> reply
> queues, where the client user has active rights.

OK -- I was not sure if multiple realms were considered a reasonable  
implementation strategy.

As far as preventing clients from reading each other's reply queues,  
the best bet seems to be generating a 'securely' random queue name.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.rabbitmq.com/pipermail/rabbitmq-discuss/attachments/20071023/a9fa3331/attachment.pgp 

More information about the rabbitmq-discuss mailing list