Mailing-List: contact user-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@couchdb.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of jason.h.smith@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.214.177 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: jason.h.smith@gmail.com
In-Reply-To: <loom.20130908T144412-655@post.gmane.org>
References: <8beb5dee1003241228h66f4960dlae5466df22079dce@mail.gmail.com>
 <e2111bbb1003241239s4980e2b4sf7e2afda67e32e24@mail.gmail.com>
 <loom.20130908T144412-655@post.gmane.org>
From: Jason Smith <jhs@apache.org>
Date: Sun, 8 Sep 2013 20:58:58 +0700
Message-ID: 
 <CACLy94WxutSKizJ+qdot1RARLEmE7yMBJDrsW8FcHycyAKLeJA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Bind Address
To: "user@couchdb.apache.org" <user@couchdb.apache.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11c2e60880cc8404e5dfad51

--001a11c2e60880cc8404e5dfad51
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Franck, how would you envision the config working for multiple IPs and
ports to bind to?

Currently they are two different configuration options, so I am trying to
understand how it would work in the general case.

For example if I want to listen to 0.0.0.0:5984 but then 127.0.0.1:80 and
then 1.2.3.4, 2.4.6.8, and 4.6.8.16 for each of ports 123, 234, 456. For
that scenario (which I think represents the most complex/flexible support
Couch could conceivably offer), how would the configuration for that look
to you?


On Sun, Sep 8, 2013 at 7:46 PM, Franck Eyraud <franck+couchdbml@yrnm.net>wr=
ote:

> Paul Davis <paul.joseph.davis@...> writes:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:28 PM, Cairo Noleto <caironoleto@...> wrote:
> > > Hi, how to set bind address for a five unique IPs? ("bind_address =3D
> > > 192.168.1.1 192.168.1.2 192.168.1.3 192.168.1.4 192.168.1.5")
> > >
> > > --
> > > Cairo Noleto =EF=A3=BF
> > > Visits http://www.caironoleto.com/
> > >
> >
> > Cairo,
> >
> > You can't. If you need to have a subset of your public IP's used then
> > you'll need to setup a proxy. CouchDB  only natively supports a single
> > interface, with the special case that 0.0.0.0 means all interfaces.
> >
> > I don't think it'd be out of the question to support a multiple
> > listener sockets but no one has been motivated to create a patch so
> > there's never really been any discussion on it.
> Hi,
>
> I think this is in fact a *very* important missing feature for couchdb to
> be
> accepted in big IT infrastructures, as well as bind on several ports...
>
> Regards,
>
> Franck Eyraud
>
>
>

--001a11c2e60880cc8404e5dfad51--