On Wed, 27 Jul 2011 02:59:08 +0200, Henrik Nordström wrote:
ons 2011-07-27 klockan 11:42 +1200 skrev Amos Jeffries:
So you are in faviour of going back to the 2.7 behaviour where
there
are effectively two near-identical reverse-proxy modes? one for
virtual
hosting and one for non.
2.7 have three accelerator modes
vhost with or without defaultsite
defaultsite alone
vport
Okay. Being pedantic yes. I consider the first and last both flavours
of "virtual hosting". First is domain based, last is IP-based.
how is this different in 3.2? I do not see any difference in reading
the
docs for 3.2.
3.2 requires a flag to turn on the mode so the additional parse checks
work properly. 2.7 has "implies accel". 3.1+ have "requires accel". This
is supposed to be the only difference until the default behaviour change
now added.
Configured so, incorporating your proposal with mine: (3.2 line is as
of revno. )
type 1: "vhost with or without defaultsite"
(NP: also with or without a custom port)
(2.7) vhost [defaultsite=] [vport[=N]]
(3.1) accel vhost [defaultsite=] [vport[=N]]
(3.2) accel [defaultsite=] [vport[=N]]
PROPOSED: vhost [defaultsite=] [port=N]
CHANGE: upgrade accel+vhost to "vhost" with notice.
type 2: "defaultsite alone"
(2.7) defaultsite=host [vport=N]
(2.7) defaultsite=host[:port]
(3.1) accel defaultsite=host[:port]
(3.1) accel defaultsite=host [vport=N]
(3.2) accel no-vhost defaultsite=host:port
(3.2) accel no-vhost defaultsite=host[:port] [vport=N]
PROPOSED: accel defaultsite= [port=N]
CHANGE: reject/error on defaultsite=host:port
CHANGE: drop auto-upgrade of accel to accel+vhost
CHANGE: drop no-vhost again. accel with absent vhost now duplicates
that.
type 3: "vport"
(2.7) vport
(3.1) accel vport
PROPOSED: ipvhost [port=N]
CHANGE: reject/error on any defaultsite=
CHANGE: upgrade accel+vport to "ipvhost" with notice.
CHANGE: alter notice of vport without prior accel or vhost to show
options
I found your mode change before you responded and agree to it.
My preferred action is what I said before. Make vhost the default
accelerator mode, and add a no-vhost option to disable it for cases
when
one want just defaultsite or vport.
regarding vport that option also needs serious cleanup. It's both
named
wrongly and overloaded with the vport=NN alternative. Better split
into
ipvhost
port=NN
and may also add
pathprefix=...
For Zope you think? nice idea.
Not entirely sure if ipvhost is even needed. Only makes sense for
massive IP based vhosting if anyone is still doing that. in all other
configurations using IP based vhosting one http_port per IP and a
suitable defaultsite is more suitable. But I would strongly advice to
always use vhost mode and at most override the port.
I agree, its probably not needed, but I'm still helping people convert
to domain based virtual hosting so probably too early to drop as well.
Amos
