Gatling HTTP‑JMS Session Scope Interoperability: Can Shared Session Attributes Cross Protocol Boundaries?

The objective is to verify whether a session attribute created by an HTTP request remains accessible when a subsequent JMS request is executed within the same Gatling scenario.

Constraints include using only built‑in session handling, testing on Gatling 3.7 and 3.8 to capture the documented change in session scope, and avoiding external feeders or databases.

Key questions: Does the session object persist across HTTP→JMS steps in Gatling 3.8? If not, what is the recommended method to share state between protocols? How does session scope differ between 3.7 and 3.8 releases?