The rmiregistry is not comparable to JNDI at all (except on a really abstract level).
JNDI is an API and a protocol. The rmiregistry is a programme.
You cannot compare JNDI and the rmiregistry - its like comparing a car to a recipe - its just not comparable.
Talking about rmiregisty without talking about RMI as a protocol/API is just pointless. The rmiregistry programme is something that facilitates the lookup of RMI based objects between remote JVMs - completely different to the concept of JNDI that is an API that allows the lookup and binding of objects in a local JVM. If there were such a thing as a "jndiregistry" then maybe you could compare the two - but that does not exist - because JNDI is an API - not a programme.
Maybe on a completely abstract level, you could say that JNDI, as a means to looking up an "object" is similar to the rmiregistry programme, because they both, at a certain level "look up" an entry - but then you would have to say that email is the same as rmiregistry, as is the index of a book, or the search functionality in a word processor - because they all provide the ability to "look up something". But then thats just stupid.
Just accept that, while RMI and JNDI have some comparisions, they are in effect, and more importantly practically, very different concepts.
--------------------------------------------------
Free Database Connection Pooling Software