httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: blocking Upgrade
Date Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:48:42 GMT
On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 11:08, Graham Leggett <minfrin@sharp.fm> wrote:
> On 30 Mar 2011, at 4:41 PM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>
>> My guess is that it would if it were told to use a proxy for ws.
>>
>> Keep in mind that when I say proxy, I do not mean to include "reverse
>> proxy".
>> A reverse proxy of websockets is just an implementation of websockets or
>> a tunnel.  I consider both to be pretty dangerous and better done in
>> a special-purpose server rather than as a child of Apache httpd.
>
> When you say "pretty dangerous", are you referring to the danger of reaching
> the limit of slots willing to be served by the server, or something else?
>
> I would say that any server that supports the idea of long lived connections
> faces this danger, I don't see why httpd (suitably and sensibly configured
> obviously, probably with an event mpm and a limit as to the number of slots
> we allow to be long lived) can't play too.

I think that Roy's point is simply that httpd would be nothing more
than a socket-listener and tunnel. There is very little that it can
bring to the table at that point, so it doesn't make a lot of sense to
lump in websockets capabilities.

Cheers,
-g

Mime
View raw message