> > I understand your concern with easy configuration. What I am advocating is > > adding all those features but still use HTTP as the transport (like > > subversion does for cvs). This eliminates the need to develop and maintain > > your own protocol, allows you to take advantage of things like SSL and any > > improvements that you make to reverse proxy, like load balancing, can be > > used by other modules or setups with any backend server, not only tomcat. > > And you keep missing my point when I say that you can already do that with > Tomcat 4.x, and WARP/WebApp are an addition to that method in terms of > performance and ease of use... We already have and use the functionality > provided by an HTTP-based reverse proxy (TC4.0/4.1, Tomcat HTTP/1.1 > connector and mod_proxy in Apache), but we need more :)
I want to understand your point :) What I understand you are saying is: a) Yes, you can do that with mod_proxy, but we need more so... b) ... we create warp connector to deal with those things that we need What I say is, instead of creating a replacement for mod_proxy, build those things that you need on top of mod_proxy (like load balancing, ability to read configuration remotely, etc.) In any case, that is just a suggestion, based on my experience. The beauty of software is that there are many ways of doing the same thing :) The point of my original email was to add a hook to mod_proxy to allow headers to be modified when talking to a backend server. I got a +1 from Chuck and some concerns from Graham suggesting if that could be done modifying headers_in. I think I have addressed those concerns and would like to ask for others +1 or additional concerns. Thanks Daniel
