well spotted, I apologise! the correct connector is mod_jk (1.2). As
for running tomcat on low ports, it depends on deployment. if your app
needs to sit within a larger site then it makes sense, but if it's
standalone then using another method to run on a low port would be a
better solution.
If the application has a lot of static content then it makes good
performance sense to put something in front of it, either apache or
squid. but that's probably not an issue in this case...;-p !
--
* Matthew Kerle
** IT Consultant* **
* Canberra, Australia*
Mobile: +61404 096 863
Email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Matthew Kerle
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Web: Matthew Kerle <http://threebrightlights.blogspot.com/>
Caldarale, Charles R wrote:
From: Matthew Kerle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Removing the port identifier
the Apache web server is excellent for this kind of thing.
There are much better ways to run Tomcat on low ports than adding the
path length of another web server; several messages have already pointed
this out.
The easiest way to do this would be with apache sitting in front of
tomcat with either mod_jk2
I hope you're not seriously recommending use of a package that's been
deprecated for over two years...
- Chuck
THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY
MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you
received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail
and its attachments from all computers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
