geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Jencks <>
Subject Re: Virtual Hosts
Date Mon, 16 Jan 2006 20:30:08 GMT

On Jan 16, 2006, at 11:30 AM, Jeff Genender wrote:

> David Jencks wrote:
>> On Jan 16, 2006, at 9:06 AM, Aaron Mulder wrote:
>>> OK, it strikes me as pretty silly that you can't configure virtual
>>> hosts in a common way for web applications, but you can for EJBs
>>> exposed as web services!
>> I suspect the implementation for ejb web services re tomcat is wrong.
> Could you please point out where it is wrong?  If no VH is set on the
> EJB side, then it is attached to the default host.  If a VH is set,  
> then
> TC looks it up to verify its existence and attaches the context to  
> that
> host.  See lines 325-337 of the TomcatContainer.  I don't see where  
> this
> is incorrect.  Did I miss something here?

I would like to revise my comment to say that Aaron's description of  
what the tomcat implementation does is wrong: the tomcat  
implementation ignores all but the first "virtual host" name.

To clarify, the tomcat and jetty interpretations of the multiple  
virtual host elements in an ejb web service plan are completely  
-- jetty: the vh elements are actually used as virtual host names
-- tomcat: the first vh element if present is used to find a tomcat  
host object, whose name has nothing to do with any aliases/virtual  
host names.

I think that this is sufficiently misleading that we should consider  
providing separate tomcat and jetty configurations for this.   
However, I fear this will be extremely unpleasant to implement.  The  
first time around I couldn't figure out any way to do this properly,  
which is why we have the current misleading and ugly hack.

david jencks

>>> That should mean we have a common configuration scheme if you  
>>> want to
>>> bind a web app to a single virtual host.  If you want to bind to
>>> multiple virtual hosts, you must either use the extended
>>> Jetty-specific syntax, or manually configure a Host GBean for Tomcat
>>> that binds to those IPs and then put the name of that GBean in the
>>> virtual-host element.
>>> Most importantly, if you do no extra configuration but put
>>> "<virtual-host></virtual-host>" in the geronimo-web
>>> plan then it will do what you expect, regardless of the web  
>>> container
>>> in question.
>> I think it will only simplify matters when each web app uses a single
>> virtual host that no other web app uses.  As soon as there is any
>> overlap it produces unstartable apps and unpredictable behavior.
>>> Would that work for everyone?
>> Definitely not, sorry
> I think after rethinking this I have to agree with DJ on this one.
> Jeff

View raw message