Hey Craig,

2009/11/27 Craig Miller <[email protected]>:
> WIM> At first sight, adding an ISAPI connector should not be too much work.
> WIM> We'd do it if it's worth the effort, but it seems to me that there is
> WIM> only limited interest in it. On the other hand, the benefits may be
> WIM> worth the effort.
>
> Oh... I should have also said that my original question wasn't
> intended to pile more work on your plate.  You're right, based on the
> email archive alone there seems to be very little interest from the
> IIS world in creating an ISAPI connector.  My were original questions
> were an initial attempt to determine how much work it might entail.  I
> was investigating to determine if this might be something I could
> contribute.  I'm quite new to Wt and ISAPI.  I'm sure that your deep
> understanding of Wt and the current connectors would enable you to
> come up with a much better ISAPI connector design than what I'd kick
> out on a first try.

I think the largest part of the challenge would be to understand the
ISAPI possibilities and pick one that is best suited.

As to Wt, the following parts are needed:

 - you need to provide an implementation for src/web/WebRequest.h
   you already have two examples: src/http/HTTPRequest.[hC] and
src/fcgi/FCGIStream.C (FCGIRequest)

 - you need to provide an implementation for src/http/WebStream.h
   but ignoring socket notifiers, that could be mostly a no-op, see
src/http/HTTPStream.[Ch]

 - when you have an incoming request, you need to wrap it into a WebRequest, and
   call WebController::handleRequest

 - you need to provide an implementation of WServer (which bootstraps
the server)
   here you probably can copy alot from src/http/WServer.C; this is
probably the most work since you need to communicate
   well with the ISS environment for startup and shutdown, finding
configuration files, etc...

That being said, I still think you need to evaluate what the added
value will be over using IIS as a reverse proxy. In the reverse proxy
scenario the following is equally true:
 - you still have only one open port in your firewall (IIS): the
wthttpds will only be listening for connections from localhost, and
this is usually (always?) not blocked by a firewall (e.g. firefox uses
this internally too to communicate between threads)
 - you can start/stop your application independent of the web server
 - you can easily debug your application from within your development
environment

Regards,
koen

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day 
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on 
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now.  http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
witty-interest mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/witty-interest

Reply via email to