Hi JB,

Thanks.
Is an instance anything more than the collection of files in the instances 
directory?
I.e. if I just created the files there myself would it be recognised by the 
instance module?

Tanks again

Jim

On 5 Feb 2014, at 14:40, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Jim,
> 
> you can already do that by changing the configuration file.
> 
> What I do: in etc/custom.properties, I set default.interface property and I 
> use it in all other configuration files (${default.interface}).
> 
> I planned to add -b option to easily change the bound interface/IP (actually 
> setting the default.interface property).
> The main issue is for application "outside" of Karaf itself (Pax Web, Camel, 
> etc).
> 
> I will resume action on this:
> 1/ commit/push my change to use it (I changed the default config file and 
> some blueprint descriptors)
> 2/ see what we can do on the Pax Web side
> 
> I keep you posted.
> 
> Regards
> JB
> 
> On 02/05/2014 11:29 AM, Jim Talbut wrote:
>> Hi,
>> 
>> I want to create a bunch of Karaf instances with each running on a
>> dedicated IP address with the same ports rather than all using all IP
>> addresses and different ports.
>> For our infrastructure this is much easier to manage (giving a greater
>> consistency with only one variable for each instance).
>> 
>> The issue https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-1128 describes
>> what I want (if the last sentence is implemented), but it's not clear
>> whether that's what the reporter wanted and it hasn't had any movement
>> in 2 years.
>> 
>> So:
>> Are there any fundamental issues with having instances running on
>> dedicated IP addresses?
>> What's the easiest way for me to get it?
>> 
>> If an instance is just the files under the instances directory I can
>> easily write a bash script that does what I need.
>> If there is a desire to get the ability into the main karaf I'm happy to
>> write a patch for the instance feature as long as it (or some corrected
>> version of it :) gets included fairly soon.
>> Or, I'm very happy to leave it to someone else to make the change.
>> 
>> This is for a new deployment, so I'm only looking at 3.X and I need it
>> usable within a month (quite happy with a temporary hack or SNAPSHOT
>> deployment or instance on that timescale).
>> 
>> Thanks.
>> 
>> Jim
> 
> -- 
> Jean-Baptiste Onofré
> [email protected]
> http://blog.nanthrax.net
> Talend - http://www.talend.com

Reply via email to