Correct. The overall goal here is to allow Apache 2.0 to handle the URL rewriting and redirection for all different types of requests. Currently we use Apache 1.3.14 for some items and the F5 load balancing box for others. The F5 has a hard limit of 100 rules in its latest version and we would rather not run into that so we decided to give Apache 2.0 a shot.
Until 2.0 is ready for prime time we'll just stick with the F5 and be careful about how many rules we add. Thanks J On Thursday, January 3, 2002, at 02:08 PM, Igor Sysoev wrote: > On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, John Armstrong wrote: > >> When the reverse proxy connects to the windows boxes it needs to >> maintain a persistent connection since the client is an appliance, >> not a >> browser. > > So if you will have persistent connection between client and frontend > and have non-persistent connection between frontend and xml backend > will it slow down your things significantly ? > > Igor Sysoev > >> This works fine with 2.0 when 2.0 is not segfaulting :) >> >> Think I'll just get out of apache land and let the F5 handle it for >> now, >> we won't hit the 100 rule limit for a few more months and hopefully >> apache 2.0 is more stable by then and can take over the URL rewriting. >> >> John- >> >> On Thursday, January 3, 2002, at 01:58 PM, Igor Sysoev wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, John Armstrong wrote: >>> >>>> Correct, with 1.0 we lose persistency and things slow down >>>> significantly. >>>> >>>> I guess I should have just said 'Persistency' in the first place, >>>> sorry >>>> about that :) >>> >>> OK. Where do you need persistent connection - between frontend and >>> xml backend or between client and frontend ? >>> >>>> On Thursday, January 3, 2002, at 01:44 PM, Igor Sysoev wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, John Armstrong wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Because the front end reverse proxy needs to connect to one of 3 >>>>>> different servers. >>>>>> >>>>>> 1) Static html server. >>>>>> 2) Mod Perl dynamic content server >>>>>> 3) Windows based xml servers that need to use 1.1 to communicate. >>>>> >>>>> So if one will make request to xml server with HTTP/1.0 then >>>>> he will receive response with error code ? >>>>> Can not it work in HTTP/1.0 at all ? >>>>> >>>>>> So for 3 we need chunked or the Content-Length, either way, we need >>>>>> 1.1. >>>>>> compatibility. >>>>>> >>>>>> John- >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thursday, January 3, 2002, at 12:33 PM, Igor Sysoev wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, John Armstrong wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This 'seems' to be a modperl issue. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> My configuration. I needed a 1.1 compliant reverse proxy in order >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> support Chunked encoding for an xml gateway. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Why do you need chunked encoding from backend ? >>>>> >>>>> Igor Sysoev >
