RE: [JK2] uriMap vhosts
De: Mladen Turk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Enviado el: 23 de septiembre de 2002 9:06 Para: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Asunto: [JK2] uriMap vhosts Hola Mladen: I agree with the introduction including the new vhost:* form, FYI uriEnv, when the host is not setted, responds that host is * :), the interpretation about _default_ ( or Global i prefer ) mappings is correct, and i know Costin did that this way because i asked so, map the capabilities of isapi in jk.. Now my question is are there any ideas how to differentiate the default host and its mappings from the _default_ mappings for every host (default and all the vhosts) in the w2.p. There is no difference, if one needs to map a Java context to one the alias of the default server, the only way to do it, is to think about the default server, exactly as any other VS, it has a name ( well in fact a namespace that includes localhost, any ip variation , the host name and some more), and do explicit mappings with the name to which one want to associate the Java Context, i see no problem with this.. Saludos , Ignacio J. Ortega -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [JK2] uriMap vhosts
-Original Message- From: Ignacio J. Ortega [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] There is no difference, if one needs to map a Java context to one the alias of the default server, the only way to do it, is to think about the default server, exactly as any other VS, it has a name ( well in fact a namespace that includes localhost, any ip variation , the host name and some more), and do explicit mappings with the name to which one want to associate the Java Context, i see no problem with this.. I don't think so. The default serverer should be namless, cause it can have many aliases, and the default port can vary. Also that way we could separate the default and vhost settings. We can do that using aliases. So for the default we should assume that its name is *:*, meaning we can map and the specific port too. [uri:*] alias=localhost alias=127.0.0.1 alias=63.251.56.142 alias=www.apache.org etc... But what if I wish that nothing from the default host be the Global mapping. Right now all the default mappings are also the global ones, which is definitely bad, and you may have some vhosts that you wish _not_ to be mapped to TC at all, but they will, cause of global mappings. The global mappings should IMO be marker as such, just to ease the config, but in general it's a bad idea, and the only benefit is that it promotes laziness ;). Right now the i_r2 uses found_vhost/default which is very bad cause the SSL connections will get mapped to the TC too, and perhaps I don't wish to do that, but I cannot. Using the upper mechanism I could be able to specify the [uri:*:443] And that will force the alias:443 mappings. So: 1. Make the alias to work 2. Get rid of Global settings as such (but can be enabled if you put the vhost as a alias to the default host) 3. Make the host:port parsing to work MT. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [JK2] uriMap vhosts
De: Mladen Turk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Enviado el: 23 de septiembre de 2002 10:47 From: Ignacio J. Ortega [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] There is no difference, if one needs to map a Java context to one the alias of the default server, the only way to do it, is to think about the default server, exactly as any other VS, it has a name ( well in fact a namespace that includes localhost, any ip variation , the host name and some more), and do explicit mappings with the name to which one want to associate the Java Context, i see no problem with this.. I don't think so. The default serverer should be namless, cause it can have many aliases, and the default port can vary. Also that way we could separate the default and vhost settings. We can do that using aliases. So for the default we should assume that its name is *:*, meaning we can map and the specific port too. Another case for language impedance? ;).. The default host does have name, a namespace that includes everything not explictely configured as a VS, in any port the server listens.. [uri:*] alias=localhost alias=127.0.0.1 alias=63.251.56.142 alias=www.apache.org etc... Ok, this defines the namespaces served by Default.. But what if I wish that nothing from the default host be the Global mapping. Right now all the default mappings are also the global ones, which is definitely bad, and you may have some vhosts that you wish _not_ to be mapped to TC at all, but they will, cause of global mappings. I dont think i understand you completely, but from my POV, it's irrelevant, we do want Global mappings? i think so, this is the way I_r.dll works right now, and we need to map such a functionality. With my proposal, can you map concrete Java Context to any of the aliases of default or all? yes we can.. The global mappings should IMO be marker as such, just to ease the config, but in general it's a bad idea, and the only benefit is that it promotes laziness ;). As said, global aliases are a reminiscent of jk's isapi, and lazyness in some environments is not bad at all, think of mass VS hosting, do we need to define a globally used Java context for every VS? we shouldn't Right now the i_r2 uses found_vhost/default which is very bad cause the SSL connections will get mapped to the TC too, and perhaps I don't wish to do that, but I cannot. I've lost the clue here, can you rephrase it? Rigth now i_r2.dll ( as i_r.dll did) uses directly the Host header, i agree that this is inherently insecure, i will change this to use, the same that apche does, to use the host in the header, but the real port.. instead of directly the Host header.. are you talking about that? Using the upper mechanism I could be able to specify the [uri:*:443] And that will force the alias:443 mappings. So: 1. Make the alias to work Ohh, never tried, are aliases buggy too? :)) In anycase i'm +1 in to have less bugs.. ;)) 2. Get rid of Global settings as such (but can be enabled if you put the vhost as a alias to the default host) This makes life very complicated to old i_r users, neither it's the best for a mass vhosting enviroment.. until a better solution, i'm -1 in unsupport Global mappings.. 3. Make the host:port parsing to work ok MT. Saludos , Ignacio J. Ortega -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: [JK2] uriMap vhosts
My only requirement: make sure whatever we define as mapping in jk2 ( i.e. jk_map, etc ) works identically with the Location in Apache. IMO this is an important use case, with Location JkSet /Location ( i.e. use the native apache mapper, bypassing jk_map). Jk_map should use mappings as close as possible to apache ( and differ only where the servlet spec forces it ). Costin Mladen Turk wrote: -Original Message- From: Ignacio J. Ortega [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] There is no difference, if one needs to map a Java context to one the alias of the default server, the only way to do it, is to think about the default server, exactly as any other VS, it has a name ( well in fact a namespace that includes localhost, any ip variation , the host name and some more), and do explicit mappings with the name to which one want to associate the Java Context, i see no problem with this.. I don't think so. The default serverer should be namless, cause it can have many aliases, and the default port can vary. Also that way we could separate the default and vhost settings. We can do that using aliases. So for the default we should assume that its name is *:*, meaning we can map and the specific port too. [uri:*] alias=localhost alias=127.0.0.1 alias=63.251.56.142 alias=www.apache.org etc... But what if I wish that nothing from the default host be the Global mapping. Right now all the default mappings are also the global ones, which is definitely bad, and you may have some vhosts that you wish _not_ to be mapped to TC at all, but they will, cause of global mappings. The global mappings should IMO be marker as such, just to ease the config, but in general it's a bad idea, and the only benefit is that it promotes laziness ;). Right now the i_r2 uses found_vhost/default which is very bad cause the SSL connections will get mapped to the TC too, and perhaps I don't wish to do that, but I cannot. Using the upper mechanism I could be able to specify the [uri:*:443] And that will force the alias:443 mappings. So: 1. Make the alias to work 2. Get rid of Global settings as such (but can be enabled if you put the vhost as a alias to the default host) 3. Make the host:port parsing to work MT. -- Costin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [JK2] uriMap vhosts
Mladen Turk wrote: 1. Making some sort of _default_ mappings These mappings are for every host on the server (both default and every vhost). There is no particular reason for that except that the workers2.properties can be smaller. 2. Making vhost:port scheme Using general vhost:* mapping no matter port number is and Using vhost:port mappings for that particular combination. If the hostname is provided than the mapping can only be done in the following cases: 1. Exact hostname:port is found 2. Hostname:* is found 3. _default_ mapping has been found. Now my question is are there any ideas how to differentiate the default host and its mappings from the _default_ mappings for every host (default and all the vhosts) in the w2.p. We can have a [ default: ] section. Or we can use 'global' settings ( attributes ). Do you have any example use-case ? How would it translate to a httpd.conf ? Costin MT. -- Costin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
