geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Mulder <ammul...@alumni.princeton.edu>
Subject Re: RES: RES: "Virtual Hosting"
Date Fri, 08 Aug 2003 19:41:20 GMT
	Ahh, a good point.  In fairness to WebLogic, you *can* set up an
HTTP-only port in addition to (or in place of) the standard "everything"  
port.  But going as far as WebLogic does with the netowrk channels and all
is probably not a good idea for V1.  Anyway, you're right that it may not
be a great idea to have the *only* option be to run everything over one
port.

Aaron

On Fri, 8 Aug 2003, Robert "kebernet" Cooper wrote:
> This is one of those things I always HATED about WebLogic, though, was 
> that you couldn't feel confident about using the internal HTTP service 
> without Apache or something in front of it because it did all coms over 
> one port. That means I either *had* to have a freestanding webserver in 
> front of it, or accept the fact that my firewall had to allow 
> connections to the T3 port.
> 
> At least isolating HTTP (SMTP, etc) ports that someone may realistically 
> want to have going through a firewall is important. Especially because 
> many firewalls know how to inspect those service ports, and get really 
> upset when they see RMI or other such traffic over them.
> 


Mime
View raw message