RFC 6167: URI Scheme for Java(tm) Message Service 1.0
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document defines the format of Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) as defined in RFC 3986, for designating connections and destination addresses used in the Java(tm) Messaging Service (JMS). It was originally designed for particular uses, but applies generally wherever a JMS URI is needed to describe the connection to a JMS provider, and access to a JMS Destination. The syntax of this JMS URI is not compatible with previously existing, but unregistered, "jms" URI schemes. However, the expressiveness of the scheme described herein should satisfy the requirements of all existing circumstances. This document is not an Internet Standards Track specification; it is published for informational purposes.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC6167
- Published
- April 2011
- Authors
- M. Phillips; P. Adams; D. Rokicki; E. Johnson
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- —
- Pages
- 22
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 6068The 'mailto' URI SchemeCurrent
October 2010
- RFC 6570URI TemplateCurrent
March 2012
- RFC 5122Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs) and Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) for the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP)Current
February 2008
- RFC 4743Using NETCONF over the Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP)Updated
December 2006
- RFC 7595Guidelines and Registration Procedures for URI SchemesUpdated
June 2015
- RFC 4622Internationalized Resource Identifiers (IRIs) and Uniform Resource Identifiers (URIs) for the Extensible Messaging and Presence Protocol (XMPP)Obsoleted
August 2006
- RFC 6943Issues in Identifier Comparison for Security PurposesCurrent
May 2013
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?