ok make it configurable and give us a diff, it will go in
amrc
|-----Original Message-----
|From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Scherr Gerolf
|Sent: Friday, October 20, 2000 3:18 AM
|To: jBoss
|Subject: AW: [jBoss-User] jBoss, firewalls & SSL/TLS
|
|
|
|
|> -----Urspr�ngliche Nachricht-----
|> Von: Rickard Oberg [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
|> Gesendet am: Freitag, 20. Oktober 2000 11:54
|> An: jBoss
|> Betreff: Re: [jBoss-User] jBoss, firewalls & SSL/TLS
|>
| [...]
|
|> > 2) Which IP-ports does jBoss listen on (e.g. 1099 for naming, 8082,
|> 8083,
|> > ... what about the jBoss/RMI counterpart to the CORBA POAManager...)?
|>
|> 4444 if I remember correctly. Either that or anonymous, i.e. whatever.
|> Having an anonymous port is good since it allows several jBoss instances
|> to
|> live on the same server, which is useful for clustering. Having an
|> anonymous
|> port is bad since it makes it harder to set up firewalls to let through
|> jBoss traffic (will this be common?). This should probably be
|configurable
|> further down the road.
|>
| I mentioned this problem already in
|
|http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg03873.html
| but I have got no response in that issue
|
| since the 4444 is hardcoded, it is not possible to have two
|instances of jboss running on the same machine (without applying my
|change)...
|
| gerolf.
|
|
|
|--
|--------------------------------------------------------------
|To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
|
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
To subscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problems?: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
