On Oct 12, 2006, at 9:33 AM, Mark Bradley wrote:
Greetings all,
I am trying to figure out how to solve this exact same problem as
described by Rick (below) where I need to deploy different apps to
different tomcat connectors on different ports (already available).
David says this capability became available in 1.1. Does anyone
know how to do this?
the wiki page has an example and discussion, can you be specific
about what more you need?
thanks
david jencks
Thanks,
-Mark
------
On Jun 13, 2006, at 9:34 AM, Rick Sears wrote:
Hello everyone,
I've been trolling the web the past couple days looking for
examples/information on how to accomplish something that is
currently
being done in an application we are looking at porting to run
under
Geronimo. We would like to be able to expose one webapp on a
non-ssl
port, say 12345, while having another webapp also running in
Geronimo
running on a different ssl-enabled port, say 54321. The webapp
running on the ssl-enabled port should not be accessible from
the non
ssl-enabled port.
I've looked at a bunch of the Geronimo documentation, but all the
things i've tried have come up short using Geronimo 1.0. There
seems
to be an example of doing something similar using Geronimo 1.1
(http://opensource.atlassian.com/confluence/oss/display/
GERONIMO/ Exposing+Web+Applications+on+distinct+ports),
but I am just wondering if i'm missing something that is also
available on Geronimo 1.0. The references to the <web-app> tag
under
the <module> tag are problematic in Geronimo 1.0, but I can't
see any
other way of tying a given deployed webapp to a particular Tomcat
container (that is exposed on one set of ports but not the other).
If anyone has any examples/information on how to tie a deployed
Tomcat
webapp to a particular container with a distinct set of exposed
ports,
please let me know.
This capability is new in 1.1. In 1.0, you might possibly be able
to get something to work by using virtual hosts, but I'm not enough
of an expert on that to give you good advice. In particular I don't
know how reliable it would be.
One other thing you might be able to use to prevent access from the
non-ssl port is use j2ee web security to require the CONFIDENTIAL
transport guarantee for the secured app. This probably wouldn't
hide the existence of the secured app but would prevent access: I
think you'd get a "forbidden" error rather than a "not found"
thanks
david jencks
