+1 on option 3 for sure.
>> My comment on prefixes is mainly that the work on the "global" addressing would potentially impact on "valid" address names, and that a simple prefix such as "queue:" might prevent the use of such addresses in a global context.
As such I would probably favour a more flexible (e.g. regex) mechanism for name "mangling".
Fair enough on the wire, but since JMS supports only topics/queues for addressing today, why not define such fixed prefixes for use by JMS and all other topic/queue based MoMs and then avoid the complex broker/client interaction of making
these configurable/vendor-specific? Ie. why would we want them to be different?
Allowing them to be different by implementation, imo, adds yet more complexity to the client/broker interaction and will only further complicate any kind of broker-to-broker addressing of topic/queues required for federation.
Shawn
