Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 47328 invoked from network); 2 Oct 2008 09:17:57 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 2 Oct 2008 09:17:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 72395 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2008 09:17:44 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-tomcat-users-archive@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 72363 invoked by uid 500); 2 Oct 2008 09:17:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@tomcat.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: "Tomcat Users List" Delivered-To: mailing list users@tomcat.apache.org Received: (qmail 72352 invoked by uid 99); 2 Oct 2008 09:17:43 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Oct 2008 02:17:43 -0700 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 [88.198.36.7] (HELO mail2.ddt-consult.de) (88.198.36.7) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Oct 2008 09:16:41 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ddt-consult.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id DF92C400247 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 2008 11:16:42 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail Received: from mail2.ddt-consult.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail2.ddt-consult.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 9n6rNcv4Tg7A for ; Thu, 2 Oct 2008 11:16:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [192.168.42.106] (p4FD363DE.dip.t-dialin.net [79.211.99.222]) (Authenticated sender: mks@list-post.mks-mail.de) by mail2.ddt-consult.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3A59B400097 for ; Thu, 2 Oct 2008 11:16:42 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <48E49179.8040904@list-post.mks-mail.de> Date: Thu, 02 Oct 2008 11:16:41 +0200 From: =?UTF-8?B?TWFya3VzIFNjaMO2bmhhYmVy?= Reply-To: users@tomcat.apache.org User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.8.1.17) Gecko/20080925 Thunderbird/2.0.0.17 Mnenhy/0.7.5.666 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: users@tomcat.apache.org Subject: Re: tomcat6 + proxy issues References: <48E454FB.9030707@ngasi.com> <48E482DB.4090002@apache.org> <48E4875F.4050003@list-post.mks-mail.de> <48E48B3F.7030307@apache.org> In-Reply-To: <48E48B3F.7030307@apache.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Mark Thomas: > Generally, and YMMV, mod_proxy_http is more stable. This is only a > generalisation though. I have used mod_proxy_ajp in the past without any > problems. Ah, OK. Since the mod_proxy_ajp setup I use is extremely simple and for a low-volume site, I don't expect any problems. > Other reasons include: > - you can use https for encryption > - it is easier (at least I find it easier) to read http in wireshark than ajp Good points. Something to keep in mind. Thanks mks --------------------------------------------------------------------- To start a new topic, e-mail: users@tomcat.apache.org To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@tomcat.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@tomcat.apache.org