--On Tuesday, July 20, 2004 10:19 PM +0200 André Malo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
the old outdated NCSA config directives? We add and add and add code -- which
is not actually bad. But where's the man with the broom?
Sounds a like job for someone. How about nominating modules for removal in
2.1, or
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
Sounds a like job for someone. How about nominating modules for removal
in 2.1, or at the very least split them off to an 'unmaintained'
distribution? We can leave them there, but boot them out of our 'core'
distribution. 2.0 saw the introduction of mod_dav and
On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 03:18:47AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
My #1 vote is to throw mod_rewrite clear off the island. =) -- justin
Why is it so important to kill off mod_rewrite that this comes up from time
to time? Just take a look at the cvs history if you think mod_rewrite is
Mads Toftum wrote:
Why is it so important to kill off mod_rewrite that this comes up from time
to time? Just take a look at the cvs history if you think mod_rewrite is
unmaintained - Andre has been doing a great job on it and there's a fairly
large userbase too.
If you really wan't to take the
--On Sunday, August 1, 2004 8:12 PM +0200 Mads Toftum [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 03:18:47AM -0700, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
My #1 vote is to throw mod_rewrite clear off the island. =) -- justin
Why is it so important to kill off mod_rewrite that this comes up from time
to
--On Sunday, August 1, 2004 8:25 PM +0200 Graham Leggett [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
And if something is broken, wrong, bad code, incomplete, then submit
some patches to fix the problem! This is why we have peer review, so that
different eyeballs get a perspective on possible flaws in the code.
No,
On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 08:25:42PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote:
Don't kill module A, kill module B instead. I suggest we don't kill
anything which has evidence of being useful.
Agreed - I just felt a bit provoked by mod_rewrite always being the target
(and hadn't seen justins patch to
.
Byron
-Original Message-
From: Graham Leggett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, July 22, 2004 8:32 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Invitation to HTTPD commiters in tomcat-dev
Guernsey, Byron (GE Consumer Industrial) wrote:
We are using mod_proxy and a patched
Guernsey, Byron (GE Consumer Industrial) wrote:
We are using mod_proxy and a patched mod_rewrite to do sticky load balancing. Mod_rewrite
supports cookies, but not session based cookies. I added this
functionality and posted the
patch here (see mod_rewrite cookie patch (PR#28391))- still
Graham Leggett wrote:
Thing is it's easier for end users to not have to mess around
with third party builds if it can possibly be avoided, and
it's the needs of the end users who are the most important,
not the developers.
It was the main reason why we tried to go beyond the concepts
Mladen Turk wrote:
Graham Leggett wrote:
Thing is it's easier for end users to not have to mess around
with third party builds if it can possibly be avoided, and
it's the needs of the end users who are the most important,
not the developers.
It was the main reason why we tried to go beyond
Mladen Turk wrote:
I don't think that it is necessary for a mod_ajp to be included inside the
mod_proxy, although they are sharing some common concepts.
I think it's very necessary - sharing those common concepts ultimately
makes for doing things in a consistent way. It makes a big difference to
Graham Leggett wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
I don't think that it is necessary for a mod_ajp to be included inside
the
mod_proxy, although they are sharing some common concepts.
I think it's very necessary - sharing those common concepts ultimately
makes for doing things in a consistent way. It
Henri Gomez wrote:
BTW, could we expect to be able to use in proxy_ajp URL like
ajp://VIRTUALNAME, where VIRTUALNAME could be the name of an
AJP cluster backend ?
That would be up to proxy_ajp to decide, so yes.
What happens is that when the config says
ProxyPass /myApp ajp://VIRTUALNAME
and the
Graham Leggett wrote:
I don't think that it is necessary for a mod_ajp to be
included inside
the mod_proxy, although they are sharing some common concepts.
I think it's very necessary - sharing those common concepts
ultimately makes for doing things in a consistent way. It
Graham Leggett wrote:
Mladen Turk wrote:
I don't think that it is necessary for a mod_ajp to be included inside
the
mod_proxy, although they are sharing some common concepts.
I think it's very necessary - sharing those common concepts ultimately
makes for doing things in a consistent way. It
Mladen Turk wrote:
I think it's very necessary - sharing those common concepts
ultimately makes for doing things in a consistent way. It
makes a big difference to the usability of httpd.
I'm sure that the 'normalization' would lead to nowhere.
I don't follow - what does normalisation would lead
Mladen Turk wrote:
Graham Leggett wrote:
I don't think that it is necessary for a mod_ajp to be
included inside
the mod_proxy, although they are sharing some common concepts.
I think it's very necessary - sharing those common concepts
ultimately makes for doing things in a consistent way.
jean-frederic clere wrote:
I see in ap_proxy_http_handler() that DECLINED allows to try another. Is
there somewhere an example of a configuration using it?
ap_proxy_http_handler() is found in mod_proxy_http, which is the helper
module that handles the HTTP protocol in the proxy framework. You
At 06:12 AM 7/21/2004, Mladen Turk wrote:
Graham Leggett wrote:
I see no point on making significant effort in a feature that
can only be used for one protocol, that's a huge waste of an
opportunity to solve the load balancing problems of backends
other than tomcat.
Quite contraty, this
a unqie cookie, would be as
fast as a normal ajp connector.
Byron
-Original Message-
From: Graham Leggett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 7:22 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Invitation to HTTPD commiters in tomcat-dev
André Malo wrote:
Where's
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004, Henri Gomez wrote:
We're discussing on tomcat-dev about a new Apache to Tomcat
Apache 2.x module.
We'd like to see some of the core HTTPD developpers joins
the discussion about the post JK/JK2 module.
As a startingpoint, how about telling us what tomcat needs that
Nick Kew wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004, Henri Gomez wrote:
We're discussing on tomcat-dev about a new Apache to Tomcat
Apache 2.x module.
We'd like to see some of the core HTTPD developpers joins
the discussion about the post JK/JK2 module.
As a startingpoint, how about telling us what tomcat needs
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004, Henri Gomez wrote:
[ chopped tomcat-dev because that bounces my mail ]
As a startingpoint, how about telling us what tomcat needs that
mod_proxy and friends don't provide?
In mod_jk/jk2, there is support for load-balancing and fault-tolerance
and it's a key feature.
Nick Kew wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004, Henri Gomez wrote:
[ chopped tomcat-dev because that bounces my mail ]
As a startingpoint, how about telling us what tomcat needs that
mod_proxy and friends don't provide?
In mod_jk/jk2, there is support for load-balancing and fault-tolerance
and it's a key
Henri Gomez wrote:
And what about using AJP/1.3 instead of HTTP for connection to tomcat ?)
In all my deployments of tomcat I have never seen the point of a custom
protocol that did exactly what HTTP does, so all my tomcat deployments
are all HTTP, with a simple mod_proxy frontend.
Even the get
Graham Leggett wrote:
Henri Gomez wrote:
And what about using AJP/1.3 instead of HTTP for connection to tomcat ?)
In all my deployments of tomcat I have never seen the point of a custom
protocol that did exactly what HTTP does, so all my tomcat deployments
are all HTTP, with a simple mod_proxy
servelt/JSP requests to tomcat, and lets Apache
handle the rest automatically.)
-Manni
-Original Message-
From: Graham Leggett [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 10:12 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Tomcat Developers List
Subject: Re: Invitation to HTTPD commiters in tomcat
Manni Wood wrote:
I very rarely post to this list, but I've been building web sites for
over eight years, and want to chime in.
In my experience building web sites for Fortune 500 companies (some of
them Fortune 50 companies), the get Apache to serve static content
while Tomcat only takes care of
Please pardon me for attempting to marshall the obvious however what is
the advantage of AJP/1.x over HTTP?
Why is it worth the development time of apache volunteers?
And why is AJP so advantageous over HTTP/1.1 that we should redesign
existing modules to use it?
I do apologize but I am not
Henri Gomez wrote:
jk was designed a long time ago so may be mod_proxy allready support
persistant connections.
Persistence will happen on the backend on the condition there was
persistence on the frontend. Generally the networks between backend and
frontend are fast enough that connection setup
Henri Gomez wrote:
It's now time to refactor and redesign it with Apache 2.x (APR/AP) in
mind to follow Apache 2.x admins habbits and try to make something
simpler.
We came on httpd-dev for advice from experts, and may be an
extended mod_proxy could be the solution. But we also want to keep
the
Wayne Frazee wrote:
Please pardon me for attempting to marshall the obvious however what is
the advantage of AJP/1.x over HTTP?
- Persistant connections, mod_jk use a pool of socket connections
to avoid reopening connections between Apache and Tomcats.
You could set socket timeout to make
: Re: Invitation to HTTPD commiters in tomcat-dev
Please pardon me for attempting to marshall the obvious however what is
the advantage of AJP/1.x over HTTP?
Why is it worth the development time of apache volunteers?
And why is AJP so advantageous over HTTP/1.1 that we should redesign
Graham Leggett wrote:
Henri Gomez wrote:
It's now time to refactor and redesign it with Apache 2.x (APR/AP) in
mind to follow Apache 2.x admins habbits and try to make something
simpler.
We came on httpd-dev for advice from experts, and may be an
extended mod_proxy could be the solution. But we
Manni Wood wrote:
One of the things I thought AJP did that HTTP proxying to Tomcat could
not (but correct me here if I'm wrong) is let the servelt container know
whether or not the connection is HTTP vs. HTTPS. This sort of
information needs to get passed back to the servlet container to satisfy
One of the big advantages of using a connector from Apache to Tomcat
is so that Apache can do what it does best, serve static content.
And Tomcat can do what it does best, handling requests for servlets/JSP
dynamice content passed to it from Apache.
Another advantage is that apache can act as a
Hi,
1. Fantastic documentation. I cannot stress this enough. Hell, I'd even
volunteer for this part. The module iteself could be poorly implemented,
problematic to compile, and have truly silly defaults, but if it was
incredibly well and clearly documented, I'd use it over mod_jk2 starting
Manni Wood wrote:
One of the things I thought AJP did that HTTP proxying to Tomcat could
not (but correct me here if I'm wrong) is let the servelt container know
whether or not the connection is HTTP vs. HTTPS. This sort of
information needs to get passed back to the servlet container to satisfy
Graham Leggett wrote:
Henri Gomez wrote:
It's now time to refactor and redesign it with Apache 2.x (APR/AP) in
mind to follow Apache 2.x admins habbits and try to make something
simpler.
We came on httpd-dev for advice from experts, and may be an
extended mod_proxy could be the solution. But we
Henri Gomez wrote:
Wayne Frazee wrote:
Please pardon me for attempting to marshall the obvious however what is
the advantage of AJP/1.x over HTTP?
- Persistant connections, mod_jk use a pool of socket connections
to avoid reopening connections between Apache and Tomcats.
You could set socket
On Tue, 20 Jul 2004, Henri Gomez wrote:
We agree and I wonder if a mod_ajp could be used in conjunction with
mod_proxy ? A sort of alternative way to route requests to tomcat.
We have proxy_http and proxy_ftp protocol modules. That begs the
question: can't proxy_ajp live alongside them?
: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 11:36 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Invitation to HTTPD commiters in tomcat-dev
Manni Wood wrote:
One of the things I thought AJP did that HTTP proxying to Tomcat could
not (but correct me here if I'm wrong) is let the servelt container
know
whether
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 10:44:40AM -0400, Manni Wood wrote:
In my experience building web sites for Fortune 500 companies (some of
them Fortune 50 companies), the get Apache to serve static content
while Tomcat only takes care of servlets and JSPs feature is a *huge*
draw.
I've replaced these
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 05:20:53PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote:
The httpd serves the static content feature can be implemented through
extending ProxyPass to support regular expressions, for example:
ProxyPass /myWebapp/*.jsp http://tomcat/myWebapp/
RewriteCond %{REQUEST_URI}
Henri Gomez wrote:
Well let see my suggestion :
ProxyPass /myWebapp/*.jsp ajp://myajpworker/
myajpworker is not a machine but a virtual resource which could be :
- a physical Tomcat using its AJP/1.3 connector
- a cluster of physical Tomcats using their AJP/1.3 connector
And via AJP/1.4 we could
Graham Leggett wrote:
The httpd serves the static content feature can be implemented through
extending ProxyPass to support regular expressions, for example:
This can be done now with mod_rewrite:
RewriteRule (.*\.jsp)$ http://backend/$1 [P]
Joshua.
to impossible
at this point in time.
Not even O'Reilly's Tomcat book proved useful in this regard.
-Manni
-Original Message-
From: Guenter Knauf [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 11:45 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Invitation to HTTPD commiters in tomcat-dev
Hi
Manni Wood wrote:
Anyway, for business sites, any servlet being able to know if the
original connection was secure or not is a total deal-breaker on
whether
or not to use a particular technology (in this case, Apache/Tomcat)
to
host a web site.
Could you develop ?
AJP already does this, so it's
everything we want
Filip
- Original Message -
From: Manni Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Guenter Knauf [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 10:58 AM
Subject: RE: Invitation to HTTPD commiters in tomcat-dev
The real trick is getting Apache to serve all of the static
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 05:20:53PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote:
The httpd serves the static content feature can be implemented through
extending ProxyPass to support regular expressions, for example:
ProxyPass /myWebapp/*.jsp http://tomcat/myWebapp/
RewriteCond
, 2004 11:51 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Tomcat Developers List
Subject: Re: Invitation to HTTPD commiters in tomcat-dev
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 10:44:40AM -0400, Manni Wood wrote:
In my experience building web sites for Fortune 500 companies (some of
them Fortune 50 companies), the get Apache
Graham Leggett wrote:
Henri Gomez wrote:
Well let see my suggestion :
ProxyPass /myWebapp/*.jsp ajp://myajpworker/
myajpworker is not a machine but a virtual resource which could be :
- a physical Tomcat using its AJP/1.3 connector
- a cluster of physical Tomcats using their AJP/1.3 connector
And
be? I'd love to help.
-Manni
-Original Message-
From: Henri Gomez [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 11:53 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Invitation to HTTPD commiters in tomcat-dev
Manni Wood wrote:
Anyway, for business sites, any servlet being able to know
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 12:08:01PM -0400, Manni Wood wrote:
Along with the ability for your back-end servlets to get a correct
value from ServletRequest.isSecure() depending on whether or not
Apache was originally contacted with HTTP vs HTTPS?
Personally, I always use Apache to authenticate
Wayne Frazee wrote:
Please pardon me for attempting to marshall the obvious however what is
the advantage of AJP/1.x over HTTP?
- binary protocol - it used to be more efficient to process it in java,
but now it's no longer a major issue
- bidirectional - it's not used only for request/response
Manni Wood wrote:
The real trick is getting Apache to serve all of the static content, and
getting tomcat to deal with only servlets and jsps.
As has been pointed out, mod_rewrite can do this already.
I notice in all of the documentation I find for mod_jk, an entire
directory (/examples/* being
Manni Wood wrote:
I asked you to develop your argument ;)
Ah. I'm trying my best. :-)
May be you could take a look as documentalist ?)
I would very happily volunteer my time to document this new module.
Where do I sign up? How do I gain acceptance as a documentor, and if I
am accepted, what
Henri Gomez wrote:
- mod_proxy + proxy_ajp could be one solution.
Now what about the mod_proxy load-balancing add-on ?
Would be a completely separate module.
The way proxy works, is that it:
- obtains the IP address to connect to (currently via DNS round robin,
but a module proxy_loadbalancer
Graham Leggett wrote:
Manni Wood wrote:
The real trick is getting Apache to serve all of the static content, and
getting tomcat to deal with only servlets and jsps.
As has been pointed out, mod_rewrite can do this already.
I notice in all of the documentation I find for mod_jk, an entire
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Tomcat Developers List
Subject: Re: Invitation to HTTPD commiters in tomcat-dev
Manni Wood wrote:
I asked you to develop your argument ;)
Ah. I'm trying my best. :-)
May be you could take a look as documentalist ?)
I would very happily volunteer my time
Graham Leggett wrote:
Henri Gomez wrote:
And what about using AJP/1.3 instead of HTTP for connection to tomcat ?)
In all my deployments of tomcat I have never seen the point of a custom
protocol that did exactly what HTTP does, so all my tomcat deployments
are all HTTP, with a simple mod_proxy
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 05:13:52PM +0200, Graham Leggett wrote:
In theory this kind of thing should not be limited to tomcat only, but
to web applications (whether PHP, whatever) in general.
Perhaps a mechanism that allows the backend to connect to the frontend
and say status has changed,
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 06:02:37PM +0100, Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
Using OPTIONS has the advantage of being backwards compatible, if you
send OPTIONS to a plain-old HTTP receiver, the standard ACK can be
taken to mean yep, I'm here. Intelligent backends (read: modify
tomcat and co slightly)
Henri Gomez wrote:
And in fine if we could have proxy_ajp included in Apache 2.x
distribution, we'll a great step in Apache2/Tomcat integration,
which should be a goal for ASF members we are.
Having proxy_ajp included in httpd v2.0 would be a good thing - there is
a base of users for it (with
At 10:20 AM 7/20/2004, Graham Leggett wrote:
Henri Gomez wrote:
It's now time to refactor and redesign it with Apache 2.x (APR/AP) in
mind to follow Apache 2.x admins habbits and try to make something
simpler.
We came on httpd-dev for advice from experts, and may be an
extended mod_proxy could be
Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
Using OPTIONS has the advantage of being backwards compatible, if you
send OPTIONS to a plain-old HTTP receiver, the standard ACK can be
taken to mean yep, I'm here. Intelligent backends (read: modify
tomcat and co slightly) can have an X-header or whatever to go
I'm
* Graham Leggett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Henri Gomez wrote:
And in fine if we could have proxy_ajp included in Apache 2.x
distribution, we'll a great step in Apache2/Tomcat integration,
which should be a goal for ASF members we are.
Having proxy_ajp included in httpd v2.0 would be a
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Invitation to HTTPD commiters in tomcat-dev
* Graham Leggett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Henri Gomez wrote:
And in fine if we could have proxy_ajp included in Apache 2.x
distribution, we'll a great step in Apache2/Tomcat integration,
which should be a goal
Wood [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 1:58 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Invitation to HTTPD commiters in tomcat-dev
Having proxy_ajp included in httpd v2.0 would be a good thing - there is
a base of users for it (with it's more advanced handling of things like
* Manni Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Having proxy_ajp included in httpd v2.0 would be a good thing - there is
a base of users for it (with it's more advanced handling of things like
indicating secure connections, etc it's useful).
Hmm. I'd include rather in tomcat distribution than
, but, Andre, as you point out, there
are good reasons for your line of thinking.
-Manni
-Original Message-
From: André Malo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 1:59 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Invitation to HTTPD commiters in tomcat-dev
* Manni Wood [EMAIL
At 12:49 PM 7/20/2004, André Malo wrote:
* Graham Leggett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Henri Gomez wrote:
And in fine if we could have proxy_ajp included in Apache 2.x
distribution, we'll a great step in Apache2/Tomcat integration,
which should be a goal for ASF members we are.
Having
André Malo wrote:
Having proxy_ajp included in httpd v2.0 would be a good thing - there is
a base of users for it (with it's more advanced handling of things like
indicating secure connections, etc it's useful).
Hmm. I'd include rather in tomcat distribution than httpd-2.0. That seems to
be way
the module and installing it in apache ( binary distributions are tricky).
Costin
-Manni
-Original Message-
From: André Malo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2004 1:59 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Invitation to HTTPD commiters in tomcat-dev
* Manni Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED
: Invitation to HTTPD commiters in tomcat-dev
Manni Wood wrote:
Perhaps I just don't undestand how infrequently Apache and Tomcat get used together.
I was under the impression (perhaps incorrectly) that they get used together often
enough to warrant the plugin's inclusion with the Apache source
* Graham Leggett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[replying to multiple posts]
André Malo wrote:
Having proxy_ajp included in httpd v2.0 would be a good thing - there is
a base of users for it (with it's more advanced handling of things like
indicating secure connections, etc it's useful).
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 11:58:00AM -0400, Manni Wood wrote:
The real trick is getting Apache to serve all of the static content, and
getting tomcat to deal with only servlets and jsps.
I notice in all of the documentation I find for mod_jk, an entire
directory (/examples/* being everyone's
André Malo wrote:
Where's the user base of mod_imap (installed by default) or mod_cern_meta or
the old outdated NCSA config directives? We add and add and add code -- which
is not actually bad. But where's the man with the broom?
The issue of unmaintained code is an important issue, but not one
79 matches
Mail list logo
