Hello Chuck,

I was going through this email thread and have a question for you.

We have a similar setup like this in one of our containers but we do not use
the address attribute as you mentioned in the connector declaration. You
mentioned that adding the address attribute is recommended to prevent port
conflicts. Can you please elaborate on this? I am having difficulties in
imagining a scenario where this would result in a port conflict (an example
would be great).

Thanks
Anurag

------------------------------------------------------------------
Anurag Kapur
Associate - Technology,
Sapient Corporation.

http://www.linkedin.com/in/anuragkapur

http://www.google.com/profiles/anuragkapur
------------------------------------------------------------------

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 7:47 PM, Caldarale, Charles R <
chuck.caldar...@unisys.com> wrote:

> > From: André Warnier [mailto:a...@ice-sa.com]
> > Subject: Re: newbie: multiple ports for same tomcat server 5.0
> >
> > What you have above, graphically (*), is like this :
>
> Nice pictures.  (The lost art of ASCII art.)
>
> > You just need to duplicate this section, and change one attribute :
> >  >     <Connector URIEncoding="UTF-8" acceptCount="100"
> >  > connectionTimeout="20000" disableUploadTimeout="true" port="8082"
> >  > redirectPort="8443" maxSpareThreads="75" maxThreads="150"
> >  > minSpareThreads="25">
> >  >     </Connector>
>
> One addition: you might want to use an address attribute in each
> <Connector> to limit which IP addresses Tomcat will listen on, and avoid
> port conflicts.
>
>  - Chuck
>
>
> THIS COMMUNICATION MAY CONTAIN CONFIDENTIAL AND/OR OTHERWISE PROPRIETARY
> MATERIAL and is thus for use only by the intended recipient. If you received
> this in error, please contact the sender and delete the e-mail and its
> attachments from all computers.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@tomcat.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@tomcat.apache.org
>
>

Reply via email to