<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=US-ASCII">
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="MS Exchange Server version 5.5.2654.19">
<TITLE>RE: Apache Web Server</TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Thanks I have a Copy of that book. We already have two
additional network cards installed. The first one is configured by Foxboro for
peer to peer (even if it is a one workstation node) The second we use to
communicate to our other control systems (Primarily Allen Bradley Ethernet PLC's) the
third we use as are plant information network. This would be the same segment
hat we would have Foxboro come in on. </FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>That is a good thought I believe I can assign multiple IP addresses to
one network card with Solaris. This would involve additional administration of
the box and DNS. I still think the most straight forward solution would be
Foxboro using a different port number.</FONT></P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>-----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>From: Windle, John [<A
HREF="mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]";>mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 12:54 PM</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>To: 'Foxboro DCS Mail List'</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Subject: RE: Apache Web Server</FONT>
</P>
<BR>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>Can you add another ethernet card to the workstation? With
another IP</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>address you can run two copies of Apache, both listening to the same
port</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>number (I think). See pp 39 - 41 of O'Reilly &
Associates Apache The</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>Definitive Guide (ISBN 1-56592-250-6).</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>If you send me a private email, I'd be glad to fax you a copy of
those</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>pages.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>John Windle</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>> -----Original Message-----</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> From: Joe Sanguinetti [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2001 1:34 PM</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Subject: FW: Apache Web
Server</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> For those of you that are using or are planning to use the
Apache web</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> server on a Foxboro I/A workstation to provide information to
your users,</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> I have some information that I think the user group needs to
address with</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> the Foxboro Company. Foxboro is apparently
installing a "Customized"</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> version of apache to allow remote access to the system as part
of remote</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> plus (the successor to foxwatch). Instead of a dial up
modem a router is</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> being used. I think this is great and welcome any help and
support that</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Foxboro can offer. Here is my concern/issue with how they
are doing this.</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Foxboro is using port 80 (the default port for web servers) as
the listing</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> port for their customized apache web server. This means
that if I want to</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> install apache I would have to configure it to listen on a
different port</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> (port 8080 for example). This would then force my users to
type in</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> <<A HREF="http://servername:8080";
TARGET="_blank">http://servername:8080</A>>. I asked if Foxboro could use a
different port</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> and was told NO. It seems to me that for the amount of
time that Foxboro</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> is going to utilize the web server compared to the amount of use
that the</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> web server I installed would get, that they should use a
different port on</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> their "Customized" version of Apache. The other
push back was for me to</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> install apache on a different workstation on the node.
That would be</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> fine, but I have several 1 Box nodes that this would not work
on. </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> I am currently
using cgi scripts with foxapi to provide real-time</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> snapshots of the system to operators, electricians, engineers
and</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> managers. By using this method I no longer have to push a
remote Foxview</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> session to individuals that only want a read only look at what
the system</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> is doing. I would be happy to share how I am doing this if
anyone is</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> interested. </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> Can the user group PLEASE comment on this. I would hope
that Foxboro will</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> respond if the user group pushes back on this. Please do
not hesitate to</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> reply back to me if you need more detail or do not understand
what I am</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> talking about</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>> </FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT
SIZE=2>-----------------------------------------------------------------------</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>This list is neither sponsored nor endorsed by the Foxboro Company.
All </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>postings from this list are the work of list subscribers and no
warranty </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>is made or implied as to the accuracy of any information disseminated
</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>through this medium. By subscribing to this list you agree to hold
the </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>list sponsor(s) blameless for any and all mishaps which might occur
due to </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>your application of information received from this mailing
list.</FONT>
</P>
<P><FONT SIZE=2>To be removed from this list, send mail to </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>[EMAIL PROTECTED] </FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>with "unsubscribe foxboro" in the Subject. Or, send any
mail to</FONT>
<BR><FONT SIZE=2>[EMAIL PROTECTED]</FONT>
</P>
</BODY>
</HTML></x-html>
