New Orleans in September" but anyone
can attend ... FOR FREE!) about migrating from mod_jk ->
mod_proxy_http and I'd like some feedback on my draft slides.
Is anyone using mod_proxy_ajp or mod_proxy_http in a production
setting and has a lot of experience with getting it all to work
... FOR FREE!) about migrating from mod_jk ->
mod_proxy_http and I'd like some feedback on my draft slides.
Is anyone using mod_proxy_ajp or mod_proxy_http in a production
setting and has a lot of experience with getting it all to work well?
My 20 years or so of experience with proxying t
Am 29. Juni 2020 22:13:10 MESZ schrieb Christopher Schultz
:
>-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>Hash: SHA256
>
>All,
>
>IMO mod_proxy_balancer is missing an important feature, and that's the
>ability to tell the back-end Tomcat node the current status of the
>worke
>r.
Why would a tomcat Backen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
All,
IMO mod_proxy_balancer is missing an important feature, and that's the
ability to tell the back-end Tomcat node the current status of the worke
r.
I've filed an enhancement in Bugzilla
(https://bz.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=64338) for
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
All,
Maybe I can earn myself a beer.
>> On 3/6/20 13:44, Rainer Jung wrote:
>>> no, the status unfortunately is not available as an Apache env
>>> var.
>
>>> mod_proxy_ajp has a builtin provision for automatic e
te:
>> Hi Chris,
>
>> no, the status unfortunately is not available as an Apache env
>> var.
>
>> mod_proxy_ajp has a builtin provision for automatic env var
>> forwarding: alle env vars named AJP_SOMETHING will be forwarded
>> as request attribute SOMETHING. B
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
Rainer,
On 3/6/20 13:44, Rainer Jung wrote:
> Hi Chris,
>
> no, the status unfortunately is not available as an Apache env
> var.
>
> mod_proxy_ajp has a builtin provision for automatic env var
> forwarding: alle env vars nam
Hi Chris,
no, the status unfortunately is not available as an Apache env var.
mod_proxy_ajp has a builtin provision for automatic env var forwarding:
alle env vars named AJP_SOMETHING will be forwarded as request attribute
SOMETHING. But I see no easy way of detecting drain mode and setting
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
All,
At $work, we use mod_jk for proxying and I'd like to move to
mod_proxy_ajp with an eye toward moving to mod_proxy_http eventually.
We use the JK_LB_ACTIVATION state to perform load-balanced
node-draining[1] for maintenance and I'm
Aurélien Terrestris wrote:
> > "Would anyone here know what is available in that respect with
> > mod_proxy_ajp ?"
> >
> > You could try this :
> >
> > LogLevel proxy:trace8
>
> That only works for httpd 2.4+, right?
>
> -chris
>
> -
Aurélien,
On 12/4/15 10:36 AM, Aurélien Terrestris wrote:
> "Would anyone here know what is available in that respect with
> mod_proxy_ajp ?"
>
> You could try this :
>
> LogLevel proxy:trace8
That only works fo
"Would anyone here know what is available in that respect with
mod_proxy_ajp ?"
You could try this :
LogLevel proxy:trace8
2015-12-03 22:41 GMT+01:00 André Warnier (tomcat) :
> Hi.
>
> Although the above module is a httpd-level, this might still be the right
> place to
is available in that respect with mod_proxy_ajp ?
Can I trace at the httpd level what is actually being proxied to Tomcat ?
Thanks.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail
rom httpd to Tomcat.
Now we have a case where we must use the Apache httpd
mod_proxy_ajp connector instead of mod_jk, and I want to make sure
that the working of the AJP Connector's attribute
"tomcatAuthentication" remains the same in that context. Does it ?
Not automatically II
where we must use the Apache httpd
mod_proxy_ajp connector instead of mod_jk, and I want to make sure
that the working of the AJP Connector's attribute
"tomcatAuthentication" remains the same in that context. Does it ?
Not automatically IIRC.
Mostly the same.
And do we have to speci
have been using mostly the Apache httpd mod_jk
connector to Tomcat. And we have been using the Tomcat AJP
Connector's 'tomcatAuthentication="false"' setting, to "propagate"
the authenticated user from httpd to Tomcat.
Now we have a case where we must use the A
connector to Tomcat. And we have been using the Tomcat AJP
Connector's 'tomcatAuthentication="false"' setting, to "propagate"
the authenticated user from httpd to Tomcat.
Now we have a case where we must use the Apache httpd
mod_proxy_ajp connector instead of mod_j
the Apache httpd mod_jk
connector to Tomcat. And we have been using the Tomcat AJP
Connector's 'tomcatAuthentication="false"' setting, to "propagate"
the authenticated user from httpd to Tomcat.
Now we have a case where we must use the Apache httpd
mod_proxy_ajp
. And we have been using the Tomcat AJP
Connector's 'tomcatAuthentication="false"' setting, to "propagate"
the authenticated user from httpd to Tomcat.
Now we have a case where we must use the Apache httpd
mod_proxy_ajp connector instead of mod_jk, and I want to ma
P
> Connector's 'tomcatAuthentication="false"' setting, to "propagate"
> the authenticated user from httpd to Tomcat.
>
> Now we have a case where we must use the Apache httpd
> mod_proxy_ajp connector instead of mod_jk, and I want
ed user from httpd to Tomcat.
Now we have a case where we must use the Apache httpd mod_proxy_ajp connector instead of
mod_jk, and I want to make sure that the working of the AJP Connector's attribute
"tomcatAuthentication" remains the same in that context.
Does it ?
And d
On 14 Mar 2015, at 4:15 PM, Graham Leggett wrote:
> I have reached the point where with an auth-method of CLIENT-CERT is
> returning the Subject DN of the certificate as the username.
>
> What I need to achieve is for tomcat to honour the REMOTE_USER environment
> variable as set by Apache htt
Hi all,
I have reached the point where with an auth-method of CLIENT-CERT is returning
the Subject DN of the certificate as the username.
What I need to achieve is for tomcat to honour the REMOTE_USER environment
variable as set by Apache httpd. I have noticed the tomcatAuthentication flag
can
com]
> > >Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 9:12 PM
> > >To: Tomcat Users List
> > >Subject: Re: Intermittent mod_proxy_ajp error - APR does not understand
> > this
> > >error code: proxy: dialog
> > >
> > >You have max clients on the apac
On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 4:20 AM, Carlucci, Tony wrote:
> >-Original Message-
> >From: Igor Cicimov [mailto:icici...@gmail.com]
> >Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 9:12 PM
> >To: Tomcat Users List
> >Subject: Re: Intermittent mod_proxy_ajp error - APR does
>-Original Message-
>From: Igor Cicimov [mailto:icici...@gmail.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2012 9:12 PM
>To: Tomcat Users List
>Subject: Re: Intermittent mod_proxy_ajp error - APR does not understand this
>error code: proxy: dialog
>
>You have max clients on th
s not understand this
> error code: proxy: dialog to 127.0.0.1:7071 (127.0.0.1) failed
>
> We are not seeing any error messages in the tcServer logs.
>
> I believe the issue is with the mod_proxy_ajp module but it's been very
> difficult tracking down what exactly the problem
ailed
[Mon Jul 23 10:03:15 2012] [error] (120006)APR does not understand this error
code: proxy: dialog to 127.0.0.1:7071 (127.0.0.1) failed
We are not seeing any error messages in the tcServer logs.
I believe the issue is with the mod_proxy_ajp module but it's been very
difficult track
rwarded by Apache to Tomcat : 1 per minute, 1 per second, 10 per
second, 100 per second, 1000 per second ?
And on average, how much time does Tomcat need to process one request ? milliseconds,
seconds, minutes ?
To answer your question more broadly : there does not seem to exist a lot of docum
On 31 Jan 2012, at 06:59, baba smith wrote:
> the problem that i'm trying to fix is that after a while that apache and
> tomcat work together, the tomcat stops responding to the apache.
> it looks like the connector itself stops working.
>
> the errors i see in the apach log are:
> "(70007)The t
the problem that i'm trying to fix is that after a while that apache and
tomcat work together, the tomcat stops responding to the apache.
it looks like the connector itself stops working.
the errors i see in the apach log are:
"(70007)The timeout specified has expired: ajp_ilink_receive() can'
baba smith wrote:
hi
i'm trying to connect apache 2 with tomcat 7 with a mod_proxy_ajp connector.
my question is: what is the relation of the tomcat server.xml connector
configuration and the apache httpd.conf?
for example, for the connector in the server.xml i can configure all kind of
tim
hi
i'm trying to connect apache 2 with tomcat 7 with a mod_proxy_ajp connector.
my question is: what is the relation of the tomcat server.xml connector
configuration and the apache httpd.conf?
for example, for the connector in the server.xml i can configure all kind of
timeouts and thread
hi,
first, thank!
now:
1. in the apache side i've a file named mod_proxy_ajp.cof that is included
from httpd.conf and it says:
AddDefaultCharset Off
Order deny,allow
Allow from all
ProxyPass ajp://localhost:9005/tracking/
ProxyPassReverse ajp://localhost:9005/tracking/
file) "workers.properties" is something used
within the context of the "mod_jk" Apache-httpd/Apache-Tomcat connector.
But you seem to be using "mod_proxy" and "mod_proxy_ajp" as an Apache-httpd/Apache-Tomcat
connector, so workers.properties should no
Thats the MPM worker settings for apache threads. You need to find the ajp
Proxy part in your config.
On Jan 26, 2012 11:14 PM, "baba smith" wrote:
> hi,
> i'm pretty much confused about the workers issue.
> my setup is an apache server and a tomcat that are connected with a
> mode_proxy_ajp conn
hi,
i'm pretty much confused about the workers issue.
my setup is an apache server and a tomcat that are connected with a
mode_proxy_ajp connector.
the porblem is that some time after that both are working, the tomcat stops
responding to apache. the errors that i see in the apache are:
1. (70007)
To Christopher and Rainer,
Thanks, that resolved the issue completely.
Best Regards,
Brett
On Thu, 2010-07-22 at 17:35 -0400, Christopher Schultz wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Brett,
>
> On 7/22/2010 1:31 PM, Brett Delle Grazie wrote:
> > Tomcat 6.0.28 (binary d
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Brett,
On 7/22/2010 1:31 PM, Brett Delle Grazie wrote:
> Tomcat 6.0.28 (binary distribution from apache).
>
> My question is, in the Tomcat server.xml, do I require _two_ AJP
> connectors as follows:
>
> (executor omitted for simplicity)
>
>
>
On 22.07.2010 19:31, Brett Delle Grazie wrote:
Hi,
I'm using RHEL5.5 (Up-to-date)
Apache httpd-2.2.3 (from RHEL) with mod_proxy/mod_proxy_ajp
Tomcat 6.0.28 (binary distribution from apache).
Tomcat native libs (1.1.20, compiled)
I have a question regarding AJP connectors and SSL
Hi,
I'm using RHEL5.5 (Up-to-date)
Apache httpd-2.2.3 (from RHEL) with mod_proxy/mod_proxy_ajp
Tomcat 6.0.28 (binary distribution from apache).
Tomcat native libs (1.1.20, compiled)
I have a question regarding AJP connectors and SSL
Our application is being SSL offloaded at the HTTPD serve
On 06/05/2010 10:52, Christian Roche wrote:
> Hi,
>
> can somebody help me with this? Should I look somewhere else (any
> dedicated forum out there)? Thanks!
>
> I have a problem with configuring mod_proxy_ajp to access Tomcat5
> through Apache2. My setup:
>
> CentOS
Hi,
can somebody help me with this? Should I look somewhere else (any
dedicated forum out there)? Thanks!
I have a problem with configuring mod_proxy_ajp to access Tomcat5
through Apache2. My setup:
CentOS release 5.4 (Final)
httpd-2.2.3-31.el5.centos.4
tomcat5-5.5.23-0jpp.7.el5_3.2
I have in
Hi,
I have a problem with configuring mod_proxy_ajp to access Tomcat5 through
Apache2. My setup:
CentOS release 5.4 (Final)
httpd-2.2.3-31.el5.centos.4
tomcat5-5.5.23-0jpp.7.el5_3.2
I have in /etc/httpd/conf.d/proxy_ajp.conf:
ProxyPass ajp://localhost:8009/
ProxyPassReverse
> worker.default.connection_pool_timeout=120
> worker.default.prepost_timeout=12
> worker.default.reply_timeout=180
> worker.default.retries=1
>
> apache 2.2.3/mod_proxy_ajp
> ProxyPass / ajp://example.org:8009/ timeout=1800 keepalive=on
120 seconds is a long t
On 13/04/2010 23:25, Russell Uman wrote:
we're trying to move from apache 2.0.52 with mod_jk 1.2.19 to apache
2.2.3 with mod_proxy_ajp in front of tomcat 5.5.28
mod_proxy_ajp was fairly new in 2.2.3, there are significant
improvements in it since then. Upgrading is essential if you want t
we're trying to move from apache 2.0.52 with mod_jk 1.2.19 to apache
2.2.3 with mod_proxy_ajp in front of tomcat 5.5.28
mod_proxy_ajp was fairly new in 2.2.3, there are significant
improvements in it since then. Upgrading is essential if you want to
use it in production.
Otherwise, go
On 13/04/2010 20:53, Russell Uman wrote:
howdy!
we're trying to move from apache 2.0.52 with mod_jk 1.2.19 to apache
2.2.3 with mod_proxy_ajp in front of tomcat 5.5.28
mod_proxy_ajp was fairly new in 2.2.3, there are significant
improvements in it since then. Upgrading is essential i
howdy!
we're trying to move from apache 2.0.52 with mod_jk 1.2.19 to apache
2.2.3 with mod_proxy_ajp in front of tomcat 5.5.28
and we've run into a troubling bug/configuration/networking problem
with apache 2.0 and mod_proxy, things are very well behaved. apache has
a connecti
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
To whom it may concern,
On 3/4/2010 12:34 AM, jkv wrote:
> We have a eye popping requirement to handle 15000 concurrent https users
> simultaneously, an I am not sure a single Apache Server and five Tomcat
> instances (what we now have) can take this?
On 05/03/2010 08:01, jkv wrote:
Thanks for the reply Ster,
"Find someone who does.", sorry when I said privilege I actually meant
option, that is I cannot install a new Apache over the older 2.2.3 and we
have to go with the default configuration. Because they have chosen RHEL 5.4
as the platfor
Thanks for the reply Ster,
"Find someone who does.", sorry when I said privilege I actually meant
option, that is I cannot install a new Apache over the older 2.2.3 and we
have to go with the default configuration. Because they have chosen RHEL 5.4
as the platform and it comes with 2.2.3 version,
On 04/03/2010 05:34, jkv wrote:
Thanks for the reply Ster,
But we don't have the privilege to upgrade Apache,
Find someone who does.
because we are using Red
Had Enterprise Linux and we have to go with the default httpd installation
in it, i.e., 2.2.3,
Why? RHEL has a built-in updater ap
Thanks for the reply Ster,
But we don't have the privilege to upgrade Apache, because we are using Red
Had Enterprise Linux and we have to go with the default httpd installation
in it, i.e., 2.2.3, but is there a possibility for us to use mod_jk instead
of mod_proxy for load balancing? I read mod
On 26/02/2010 06:36, jkv wrote:
We are using the above setup to load balance http and https request, for
https request
Apache HTTPD 2.2.3 was released on 28 Jul 2006, you should definitely
upgrade to the latest version, there have been *many* important updates
since then.
Tomcat 6.0.13 was
://localhost:8209/test
ProxyPassReverse /test ajp://localhost:8309/test
Thanks in advance.
--
View this message in context:
http://old.nabble.com/Apache-2.2.3---mod_proxy_ajp---Tomcat-6.0.13-Loadbalancing-tp27714229p27714229.html
Sent from the Tomcat - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com
he correct mime type to the content-type header. The
> problem is that when the JSESSIONID is appended onto the URL it defaults
> the mime type to text/plain regardless of the extension. This seems
> like a bug but I'm not sure if this a problem with mod_proxy or
> mod_proxy_ajp.
to the content-type header. The
> problem is that when the JSESSIONID is appended onto the URL it defaults
> the mime type to text/plain regardless of the extension. This seems
> like a bug
Be sure that it is a feature.
> but I'm not sure if this a problem with mod_proxy o
NID is appended onto the URL it defaults
the mime type to text/plain regardless of the extension. This seems
like a bug but I'm not sure if this a problem with mod_proxy or
mod_proxy_ajp. I was looking for a flag to turn off JSESSIONID
altogether but it doesn't exist, unfortunately.
2010/1/4 Darren Salomons :
> I am having an issue with Apache 2/mod_proxy_ajp and Tomcat 6. I have
> monitored all the headers coming back from apache for various scenarios
> and the only scenario that I am having a problem with is when I have a
> JSESSIONID appended to the UR
I am having an issue with Apache 2/mod_proxy_ajp and Tomcat 6. I have
monitored all the headers coming back from apache for various scenarios
and the only scenario that I am having a problem with is when I have a
JSESSIONID appended to the URL. When the JSESSIONID is appended to the
URL the mime
"ArthIT" wrote in message
news:26531167.p...@talk.nabble.com...
>
> Hi,
>
> we are facing some weird problems at one of our customers.
> Our application is running on a tomcat server behind a Apache2 Webserver
> which does SSL.
> The servers are connected with mo
Hi,
we are facing some weird problems at one of our customers.
Our application is running on a tomcat server behind a Apache2 Webserver
which does SSL.
The servers are connected with mod_proxy_ajp.
The network is a slow 2MBit WAN which is used to capacity.
Within this infrastructure we
Hi,
we have one Apache-2.2.13 running mod_proxy_ajp + mod_proxy_balancer,
connected to (3) Tomcat-6.0.20 instances under Fedora release 8. We
are experiencing some issues with high CPU load on the Tomcat side,
and Apache starts logging errors like this
[Fri Oct 30 14:47:43 2009] [error] (70007
Am Thu, 24 Sep 2009 10:54:56 -0500
schrieb "Strickland, Lawrence P" :
> I am having some problems building mod_jk on AIX and I see the same
> functionality is supported in mod_proxy_ajp.
> Does anyone have some good reason why I should use one over the other?
Using mod_proxy_
Strickland, Lawrence P wrote:
> Should I use mod_jk or mod_proxy_ajp for my Apache2 to Tomcat5 connector
> on AIX ?
>
> I am having some problems building mod_jk on AIX and I see the same
> functionality is supported in mod_proxy_ajp.
> Does anyone have some good reason why I s
Should I use mod_jk or mod_proxy_ajp for my Apache2 to Tomcat5 connector
on AIX ?
I am having some problems building mod_jk on AIX and I see the same
functionality is supported in mod_proxy_ajp.
Does anyone have some good reason why I should use one over the other?
Larry Strickland
Lead Systems
, running Redhat El5, and
source-compiled Apache 2.2.11, with mod_proxy and mod_proxy_ajp enabled.
The relevant Apache config section is:
--
# Proxy onto application server
ProxyPass /hops-backoffice
ajp://fsr-bun-app01:8009/hops-backoffice
ProxyPassReverse/hops
Not 100% sure, whether this is part of the problem, but the changelog
>> contains:
>>
>> Changes with Apache 2.2.10
>>
>> *) Allow for smax to be 0 for balancer members so that all idle
>> connections are able to be dropped should they exceed ttl.
>&
but the changelog
> contains:
>
> Changes with Apache 2.2.10
>
> *) Allow for smax to be 0 for balancer members so that all idle
> connections are able to be dropped should they exceed ttl.
> PR 43371 [Phil Endecott ,
> Jim Jagielski]
>
> Since mod_proxy_
mod_proxy_ajp and mod_proxy_balancer are rapidly improving,
seriously try the latest (2.2.11).
Regards,
Rainer
On 06.05.2009 14:41, Arne Riecken wrote:
> I need to either close the ajp connections or send keepalive messages
> because there is a firewall with a timeout of 1h betwe
I need to either close the ajp connections or send keepalive messages
because there is a firewall with a timeout of 1h between the mod_proxy_ajp
(Apache 2.2.9) and the JBoss Server with ajp connector and
in server.xml.
Setting
BalancerMember ajp://hostname status=-H ping=3 smax=0 ttl=600
did
Hello,
question about keepalive for mod_proxy (via ProxyPass directive) AJP
connections:
"This flag will tell the Operating System to send KEEP_ALIVE messages on
inactive connections (interval depends on global OS settings, generally
120ms)"
(http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/mod/mod_proxy.html#pr
On 27.04.2009 17:39, Arne Riecken wrote:
> Thanks, I did that bevore posting but did not understand id clearly. There
> is written:
>
> "Any connections above smax are subject to a time to live or ttl. Apache
> will never create more than the Hard Maximum or max connections to the
> backend server
Thanks, I did that bevore posting but did not understand id clearly. There
is written:
"Any connections above smax are subject to a time to live or ttl. Apache
will never create more than the Hard Maximum or max connections to the
backend server."
"smax [...] Upto the Soft Maximum number of conne
On 26.04.2009 03:05, Arne Riecken wrote:
> Hello,
>
> in the past I used mod_jk with workers with connection_pool_timeout=600 and
> tomcat ajp connector with corresponding connectionTimeout=60 as
> recommended.
>
> Now I additionally want to use mod_proxy_ajp with a
Hello,
in the past I used mod_jk with workers with connection_pool_timeout=600 and
tomcat ajp connector with corresponding connectionTimeout=60 as
recommended.
Now I additionally want to use mod_proxy_ajp with apache 2.2.9. Where in
apache httpd do I honour the tomcat connectionTimeout
Hi,
we are using Tomcat 5.5.26 with mod_proxy_ajp and apache httpd 2.2. The
dynamic content is served by tomcat and the static content is served by
httpd.
May there be any traffic from tomcat itself or mod_proxy or httpd to the
browser before the response from my webapp is send?
I mean some
> -Original Message-
> From: Plana, Richard [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2008 10:30 AM
> To: Tomcat Users List
> Subject: Mod_proxy_ajp and App Returing Generic Files For Download
>
> Hi,
>
> We're wanting a servlet request to return a generic
ponse.setContentLength(ret.length());
PrintWriter writer = response.getWriter();
writer.write(ret);
writer.flush();
...
return null;
}
This would work with Tomcat's HTTP interface as well as mod_jk, but with
mod_proxy_ajp, we get an "Error downloading page" fr
Plana, Richard schrieb:
I've upgraded to httpd-2.2.9 and added ping=120 to my BalancerMember
line and the connection still times out and becomes hung. The only thing
I'm getting on the logs is the following:
[Thu Jul 03 14:02:12 2008] [error] (70007)The timeout specified
has expired: ajp
om: Rainer Jung [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 5:05 PM
To: Tomcat Users List
Subject: Re: Problem with mod_proxy_ajp Connection Timeout
Plana, Richard schrieb:
> Hi,
>
> Our Apache httpd proxy connects to the two tomcat servers
> (load-balanced) through a netwo
xing this? I tried adding a
ProxyTimeout 60 option, but that didn't seem to work. Is there a way to
tell mod_proxy_ajp that if it's idle for a given amount of time to close
the connection? (And establish a new one when a request comes in)
Look at
http://httpd.apache.org/docs/2.2/mo
a
ProxyTimeout 60 option, but that didn't seem to work. Is there a way to
tell mod_proxy_ajp that if it's idle for a given amount of time to close
the connection? (And establish a new one when a request comes in)
--
Richi Plana
"Luca Stramenga" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Hi,
> We setup an Apache Tomcat servlet and JSP engine using mod_proxy ajp as
> connector to host a JAVA application.
>
> Here is the httpd.conf entry:
>
> ProxyRequests Off
>> ProxyVia Off
>> ProxyPreserveHost On
>> P
> From: Luca Stramenga [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: tomcat mod_proxy_ajp and root path
>
> > > directory="/usr/share/tomcat-5.5.26/logs" prefix="domain.com"
> > suffix=".log" timestamp="true" />
If you're really u
Hi,
We setup an Apache Tomcat servlet and JSP engine using mod_proxy ajp as
connector to host a JAVA application.
Here is the httpd.conf entry:
ProxyRequests Off
> ProxyVia Off
> ProxyPreserveHost On
> ProxyPass /servlet/ ajp://www.domain.com:8009/
> ProxyPassReverseCookiePath / /servlet
> ProxyP
On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 4:00 PM, Jim Jagielski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Seems to me you are using Apache as a front-end to
> TC. In which case you are telling Apache that whatever is
> under /examples should be handled by TC, everything else
> is local... Right so far?
Yes in this case. In
James,
You could put the stunnel into a while loop that makes it.
perhaps you could send yourself an email each time it closed ?
stunnel is probably the easiest to setup.
I had written a secure version of mod_ajp for apache 1.3 (ie years ago)
which did the whole ssl encryption of the traffic wi
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
James,
James Ellis wrote:
| I have done some goog'ling on IPSec and VPN and I have found three
| possibilities:
|
| 1) OpenSSH and Port Forwarding
|
| 2) OpenVPN
|
| 3) Stunnel (thanks little voice)
|
| What concerns me about all three options is err
I have done some goog'ling on IPSec and VPN and I have found three
possibilities:
1) OpenSSH and Port Forwarding
2) OpenVPN
3) Stunnel (thanks little voice)
What concerns me about all three options is error handling. If my OpenSSH or
OpenVPN or Stunnel connection failed/timed out, the w
application which, due to restrictions by third party
developers must run on Tomcat 4.1.31 with Java version 1.4.2_11.
I am deploying this on a new RHEL 5 machine, with
httpd-2.2.3-11.el5_1.3. From my reading, it appears that
mod_proxy_ajp is the way to go, and I aim to loadbalance several
instances, so
stunnel
On Mon, 2008-03-03 at 18:39 -0800, David Rees wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 9:26 AM, James Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Do you think that little hollow voice can clarify how IPSec would solve this
> > problem by giving an example of a software that I could implement to
> > a
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 9:26 AM, James Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do you think that little hollow voice can clarify how IPSec would solve this
> problem by giving an example of a software that I could implement to
> accomplish this?
Google IPSec and VPN and you will find your answer.
-Dav
gt; Subject: Re: mod_jk or mod_proxy_ajp - encryption
> benefits?> > A hollow voice whispers, "IPSec".> > -- > Mark H. Wood, Lead
> System Programmer [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Typically when a software vendor says
> that a product is "intuitive" he> means the exact opposite.>
A hollow voice whispers, "IPSec".
--
Mark H. Wood, Lead System Programmer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Typically when a software vendor says that a product is "intuitive" he
means the exact opposite.
pgpXHb0gRtjuo.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 6:42 PM, Martin Gainty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> PCI-DSS calls for encryption on all channels where payment information will
> be transmitted is the configuration described here non PCI-DSS compliant?
No, PCI-DSS calls for encryption of card data across open, public
net
t;
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2008 7:15 PM
Subject: RE: mod_jk or mod_proxy_ajp - encryption benefits?
Inline:
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: mod_jk or mod_proxy_ajp - encryption benefits?
> Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 15:31:21 -0800
>
>
> &qu
Inline:
> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: mod_jk or mod_proxy_ajp - encryption benefits?
> Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 15:31:21 -0800
>
>
> "James Ellis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
"James Ellis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Inline:
>
>> Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 18:16:24 +0100
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> To: users@tomcat.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: mod_jk or mod_proxy_ajp - encryption benefit
1 - 100 of 214 matches
Mail list logo
