On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 12:17 PM, David Jencks <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Feb 9, 2009, at 9:03 AM, Jarek Gawor wrote: > >> On Mon, Feb 9, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Kevan Miller <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> On Feb 9, 2009, at 12:11 AM, Jarek Gawor wrote: >>> >>>> Hey, >>>> >>>> To configure most our Geronimo services to bind to a specific network >>>> interface the user sets the "ServerHostname" property. However, for >>>> Corba services the user must also set "COSNamingHost", "ORBSSLHost", >>>> and "ORBHost" properties. So, altogether the user must configure 4 >>>> different properties. I'm wondering if we can just get rid of the >>>> "COSNamingHost", "ORBSSLHost", and "ORBHost" properties and just use >>>> "ServerHostname" property for everything? That should make things a >>>> little easier for the user. >>> >>> Sounds good to me. I don't know why those corba-based Host properties >>> were >>> separate from ServerHostname to begin with. I searched email list and >>> didn't >>> see anything signficant, other than they were different. >>> >>> I wonder if it would be best to have all of the host settings to be >>> seperately customizable, but default to ServerHostname. Something like: >>> >>> ServerHostname=0.0.0.0 >>> ORBSSLHostname={ServerHostname} >>> ActiveMQHostname={ServerHostname} >>> JettyHostname={ServerHostname} >>> ... >>> >>> Then customize the JettyHostname, when you want to alter the ip address >>> used >>> by web container clients... >> >> Yes, that would be nice but we don't support this type of variable >> expansion in config-substitutions.properties right now AFAIK. >> Something we might need to add first. > > I think we can use ServerHostName for all of them ... this involves changing > the plugin metadata in the poms for the plugins. > > If someone wants to use different host names for the different plugins they > can change the config.xml for the gbeans to use a different substitution > variable name. There's an automated way to do this using an overrides file > if you are assembling a custom server using maven, otherwise I think anyone > wanting to do this will be sophisticated enough to edit config.xml by hand.
Right. That's what I was thinking too. I'll go ahead and make everything use ServerHostname property for now. We can switch to what Kevan suggested once/if we have support for it. Jarek
