Hi Geruel, Are you talking about mod_jk2? As far as I know, the issue is not really on security but on the configuration. Developers shy away from using jk2 because of the complexity in the configuration. But aside from that, jk2 seems to be better than jk architecturally since the native code has been restructured thus making it more modular than jk. This is the reason why many *nix developers are attracted to jk2; the restructuring enabled jk2 to use unix-sockets (uses the UNIX domain sockets as contrasted to using IP sockets and should be faster in many cases). Thus, jk2 is advantageous when Apache and Tomcat resides on the same Unix machine.
However, the reason why it's discouraged to use jk2 (at least in production environments) is because the development and eventually testing on the connector has been ceased. And the number of helpful links in the net referring to jk2 is a bit measly compared to jk. So what it means is that when it breaks, you're on your own man. In any case, the recent versions of jk have already ported much of jk2 codes into it. So there's not really much reason why one should use jk2. Lange ________________________________________ From: Geruel M. Casibu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2006 8:32 AM To: Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Technical Discussion List Subject: Re: [plug] Apache + Tomcat + mod_jk2.so [Scanned] Are there an issue here in terms of security since it has already no support?
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_________________________________________________ Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List [email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
