## 1 Introduction  
Service provisioning and execution more and more often requires cooperation and thus the exchange of information among IT systems. Various integration styles are used. Among the most widely known are the following: file transfer, shared database, remote procedure invocation, and messaging. The most flexible and loosely coupled is the last one, and, thus, the paper concentrates on that style. Integration flows enable communication between systems using various data formats or communication protocols. The set of Enterprise Integration Patterns (EIP) for integration flows was defined by [PERSON] and [PERSON] [1] and is widely known in the community. However, there are differences in the implementation and naming of particular patterns for different message brokers. For example, the Apache Camel integration framework introduces the Change Data Capture pattern that can be used as the Messaging Bridge pattern [2]. In addition, there are new, specialized versions of EIPs for the currently used message brokers, especially in lightweight architectures such as microservices. Widely used is an open-source messaging queue ZeroMQ [3]. That framework defines new specializations of two EIPs: Request-Retry and Publish-Subscribe. Moreover, messaging patterns are still a topic of research studies. Recently, the Saga pattern was enhanced for distributed transactions in microservices architecture by [PERSON] et al. [4]. In addition, [PERSON] et al. [5] showed an implementation of the Publish-Subscribe pattern in microservices architecture that employs container orchestration in Kubernetes. Additionally, [PERSON] et al. [6] emphasized in their literature review that integration solutions using Enterprise Service Bus are mainly realized in service-oriented architecture, and more research is required on the Internet of Things (IoT) and cloud-based systems. When designing the exchange of messages between systems, it is important to be able to model integration flows in a unified manner. Practitioners commonly use the UnifiedModeling Language for software architecture descriptions. [PERSON] et al. [7] surveyed practitioners as to discover the usage of UML diagrams and architectural views. Informational (99% of asked professionals) and functional (96% of surveyed experts) views are the most popular. The work revealed that the UML class diagram is the most commonly used (85% of inquired specialists) for data structure modeling, whereas the UML deployment diagram is usually adopted for infrastructure modeling (71% of questioned professionals). It should be also noted that the UML activity diagram is quite frequently used for data flow modeling (65% of queried professionals). UML offers stereotypes as extensibility mechanisms to provide new semantics. Stereotypes are grouped into logically consistent sets called profiles. In recent work, [PERSON] and [PERSON] [8] presented Data Integration Patterns strictly connected with information systems interoperability. However, those patterns focus on the data, and UML has been used to model data integration tasks. There is a gap between the originally defined set of Enterprise Integration Patterns and the ones that are currently being developed. Therefore, there is a necessity to gather a set of messaging patterns that also include academic patterns and those designed in open-source frameworks. For modeling purposes, there is also a need for structural elements that are responsible for realizing actions representing messaging patterns. Last but not least is the modeling method of integration flows situated in the architectural views model. The contribution of the paper comprises the new _UML Profile for Messaging Patterns_ with stereotypes for patterns resulting from the research carried out: [PERSON] et al. [4], [PERSON] et al. [5], [PERSON] et al. [9], and [PERSON] et al. [10]. The profile includes new patterns in the context of the open-source messaging queue ZeroMQ [3].