Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 85346 invoked from network); 19 Jan 2011 22:45:11 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 19 Jan 2011 22:45:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 13084 invoked by uid 500); 19 Jan 2011 22:45:08 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-httpd-users-archive@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 13049 invoked by uid 500); 19 Jan 2011 22:45:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@httpd.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk Reply-To: users@httpd.apache.org list-help: list-unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list users@httpd.apache.org Received: (qmail 13041 invoked by uid 99); 19 Jan 2011 22:45:07 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 22:45:07 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.160.57.126] (HELO mail.adaptr.nl) (83.160.57.126) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 22:45:01 +0000 Received: from Slackintosh.local (unknown [10.10.10.209]) by mail.adaptr.nl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 88D901D80AB for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2011 23:44:39 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4D376957.8020302@adaptr.nl> Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 23:44:39 +0100 From: Jeroen Geilman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: users@httpd.apache.org References: <4D36061E.9000101@gmx.at> In-Reply-To: <4D36061E.9000101@gmx.at> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [users@httpd] Apache Reverse Proxy On 1/18/11 10:29 PM, Christian Pascher wrote: > Hi, > > I have a topology with two apache webservers. I want to set up a new > server as a reverse proxy with caching and load balancing. mod_proxy_balancer will do nicely. > As far as I know, this works fine with apache and I don't need extra > software like squid. Am I right? It depends on your requirements, really. If you need esoteric things like (external) proxy authentication or fine-grained client ACLs, squid is better equipped for that. As an application frontend loadbalancer, apache works very well. -- J. --------------------------------------------------------------------- The official User-To-User support forum of the Apache HTTP Server Project. See for more info. To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org " from the digest: users-digest-unsubscribe@httpd.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@httpd.apache.org