On 28 Aug 2002, Bojan Smojver wrote:
> Date: 28 Aug 2002 23:27:18 +1000
> From: Bojan Smojver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Reply-To: Tomcat Developers List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Tomcat Dev List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Spec question: RE BUG 12052
>
> Craig,
>
> I think this bug report is invalid, since Tomcat/Apache has no knowledge
> of load balancers and firewalls, so it is unrealistic to expect to
> return port numbers that it doesn't know about. What do you think?
>
> http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=12052
>
> Other opinions welcome :-)
>
There are circumstances when we're not going to know the port number, but
normal use of Tomcat behind JK doesn't seem to be one of them, IMHO.
Consider Apache running on port 80, forwarding to Tomcat on 8009 (the
default setup). I think it's reasonable for the application developer to
assume that getServerPort() is going to return 80 and not 8009, because
they should conceptually view the entire "Apache+Tomcat" thing as a single
server.
As for implementing this, a couple of possibilities:
* Include the port number along with the host name (haven't checked
if this is already happening)
* Add a protocol variable in the JK protocol so that the web server
can forward which port number the request was received on.
* Add a Connector property saying the port number that should be
used for getServerPort() for all requests processed by this connector
(the deprecated HttpConnector code had proxyPort for this purpose).
If a load balancer or proxy *ahead* of Apache is doing the port shifting,
there's not a lot we can do. But we should cover the case for requests
that come in to the web server and get forwarded by us.
> Bojan
Craig
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
