Connecting ACE Dashboards (AKS) to an IBM MQ queue manager(on premisses)

Idea review. Thank you for taking the time to raise this suggestion and for the additional comment which you provided in response to Rob Convery's questions. Through this conversation it appears that the issue being faced here does not relate to a capability of the ACE Dashboard but is actually more about the way in which connections are made by ACE message flows when reading / writing to MQ queue managers in situations where the message flow is running in a non-OpenShift Kubernetes environment. From the further comments supplied it is understood that the MQ queue manager(s) which you would like to connect to are *not* in the Kubernetes environment on AKS, but are running in a traditional on-premises data center. In this situation (and other cases where a secure connection is required to communicate with an on-premise system) ACE provides a technology which we refer to as a Switch Server. This works by running an agent process on premise which makes an outbound connection to the Switch Server, where a mutual authentication exchange of certificates is used to then set up a bi-directional secure tunnel for data flowing between the agent system and the integration server running in the cloud (in this case in AKS). It sounds like the customer is aware of the Switch technology but sees three potential drawbacks, and hence why this idea was raised. Of the three drawbacks the first one mentions redeveloping flows that already existed on IIB and are moving to this new environment. The message flow should not need to change in circumstances where it uses the switch technology. The Switch does need to be run and configured, but the message flows won't need to be changed. The second downside mentioned was increased complexity to sustain the MQ put and get processes. It would be great if you could expand on this perceived complexity. MQ itself should not need to be changed, and the flows should not need to be changed, so this really comes down to complexity of configuring the Switch. If you have specific suggestions for which parts of this configuration are seen as complex, then this could make the idea suggestion more actionable than its current form. Similarly, the objection (3) of bigger consumption of computation resources requires deeper explanation - is this a concern with the overhead of running the switch server, or a perceived difference in the performance of the message flow itself? Given the above commentary, for now, we are updating the status of the idea as Not Under Consideration but if more clarity could be provided then as always we would be happy to engage further.

Can you provide a bit more information on what your trying to achieve?

Today the ACE Dashboard does not support any direct MQ integration, it only supports App Connect IntegrationServers and IntegrationRuntimes. It provides the ability to create configurations which contain MQ connection information that can be used by IntegrationServers/IntegrationRuntimes to connect to MQ queue managers. This is available in both Openshift and Kubernetes.