Mailing-List: contact dev-help@tomcat.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Tomcat Developers List" <dev@tomcat.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of costin@gmail.com designates
 72.14.204.198 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references;
        b=TtNxbXkjgp8cRDwI5C/z0L4Ik1dLon0qITZFy3GitWZttKm6yIAvr69/06eS559AxF8cWhMzFPE84a1FMKGTolVp1e2gyLmlu+AQLY9zXRDCVAd7O7I0JTiH0WVNueGFUdMe0kAixpdJx7rwx3CUq4xi+crdGeXFbGiRWO11Nlk=
Message-ID: <96e4b5230510241831i5c8d252ek4b5d0f92827da0a2@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2005 18:31:26 -0700
From: Costin Manolache <costin@gmail.com>
Reply-To: costin@apache.org
To: Tomcat Developers List <dev@tomcat.apache.org>
Subject: Re: Status/Authority of AJP/1.5
In-Reply-To: <435D822E.3060301@rowe-clan.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <435D4970.9070601@rowe-clan.net>
	 <00e201c5d8e3$959c6e40$7037a8c0@nt.wilshire.com>
	 <96e4b5230510241511p58422cc5n3d32a8550f741271@mail.gmail.com>
	 <435D822E.3060301@rowe-clan.net>

I see. Sorry, I've been sleeping for quite a while, I'm slowly getting
up to speed with the latest developments.

Are you saying that mod_proxy_ajp is significantly faster than
mod_proxy ? That's interesting.

To answer your question - ajp10 and ajp11 were used in JServ,
developed in Apache.
Ajp12 is based on 11, developed in the early days of tomcat. I think
jetty also suppors ( or supported ) the protocol at some time.

IMHO - if a new version of the protocol is developed, there are 2 choices:
- preserve backwards compatibility - there are few ugly way to do this
- break backwards compatibility - in wich case it may be better to
redo the protocol so it is extensible, and maybe even better reuse an
existing protocol. An example to look at is the DBUS protocol ( from
freedesktop ) - or maybe classical RPC. Ad-hoc arbitrary binary
protocols can be a bad idea - as we see with ajp12 extensibility
problems.


Costin

On 10/24/05, William A. Rowe, Jr. <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> Costin Manolache wrote:
> > I tought some time ago AJP was 'deprecated' - to be replaced with
> > plain HTTP and mod_proxy ?
>
> Why?
>
> It turns out that mod_proxy_ajp v.s. mod_proxy_http does prove the validi=
ty
> of optimizing the backend connection.  I don't think anyone forsees mod_j=
k
> being deprecated (at least, not insofar as it supports IIS/Netscape/Sun
> http servers), but from an Apache perspective, hopefully mod_proxy_ajp wi=
ll
> make mod_jk/Apache a footnote in history :)
>
> Bill
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tomcat.apache.org