Le [Wed, 18 Jun 1997 13:46:15 -0700], Maj Justin Seiferth ecrivait :

>  My take on communications:
>          - use ASCII communications (via messages) to a port just like
>  many other internet services.  This makes it easy to debug, expand and
>  service with different interface mechanisms.

On this particular point, I think that instead of re-coding a (natively)
proprietary protocol, you can use the underlyinh HTTP protocol and package
all the configuration stuff into a module somewhere in the server (keep
in mind that HTTP is well-designed for auth/security/graphical display)

>          - for a single machine, use the conf files in place.  Just parse
>  and rewrite them. Make the conf system drop in without changing a
>  working configuration.  

The Netscape's approach is interesting : having a kind of revisions
managment (such the one done with RCS) so you can build a new configuration,
put it online, BUT still be able to put the old files back ...

>  You only need something more sophisticated when you're working with more 
>  than one machine and while that's a worthy goal it's not necessary upfront 
>  and with a good design should be able to be appended to a working conf 
> server 
>  without major revisions to Apache or the server itself. That said, a 
> database 
>  driven system working across  multiple machines would make Apache god-like 
>  in quality but first things first.

What about NFS for that ? It's exactly what you need, one config directory
per server ... (this is the way we deal with WEB server configs here at
VTCOM)

Regards,
Pierre-Yves

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Pierre-Yves KEREMBELLEC         Phone # +33 1 46 12 67 50
VTCOM                           Fax   # +33 1 46 12 67 00
40, rue Gabriel Crie            E-mail  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
92245 Malakoff Cedex, France    Systemes et Reseaux
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

Reply via email to